Tag Archives: Kim Jong Un

Sticking it to Trumpian critics of North Korea

Originally posted on the Washington Times

President Trump’s speech to the South Korean parliament on the evil of the Kim Jong-un regime was the best so far of his presidency and has been widely described as “Reaganesque.”

I agree, but the address also resembled an important 2003 speech on the North Korean threat by John Bolton titled “A Dictatorship at the Crossroads” when he was undersecretary of State for arms control and international security. Opposition to this speech was similar to the internal opposition that Mr. Trump’s policies are facing today.

In his speech, Mr. Bolton condemned North Korea’s abysmal human rights record, calling the country a “hellish nightmare” and discussed torture by the regime, including chemical and biological warfare experiments on inmates. Mr. Bolton also gave a devastating indictment of Pyongyang for developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and ballistic missiles.

The speech enraged the North Korean government and led it to call Mr. Bolton “human scum” and bar him from multilateral talks on its nuclear program. The Washington Times ran a front-page headline story about the North’s nutty reaction to the Bolton speech and published a cartoon of Kim Jong-il as a slug standing before a giant shoe labeled “John Bolton” by the late Times cartoonist Bill Garner. Both were framed and proudly displayed in Mr. Bolton’s State Department office.

There was enormous resistance to Mr. Bolton’s North Korea speech from State Department and intelligence community careerists — now called “the swamp” — who were determined to resist the tough approach to North Korea voiced at the time by President George W. Bush and Mr. Bolton. U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Thomas Hubbard, a career Foreign Service officer, complained to Secretary of State Colin Powell that the speech had not been cleared and accused Mr. Bolton of freelancing. I know Mr. Hubbard’s complaints were false since I was Mr. Bolton’s chief of staff and worked with the author of the speech to ensure it was fully cleared within the State Department, with other government agencies and the White House.

This “swamp” resistance eventually transformed the Bush administration’s tough approach to North Korea during the first Bush term into appeasement by the second. While Mr. Bolton could give speeches about North Korea, he had no control over State Department regional bureaus like the East Asia and Pacific Affairs Bureau (EAP). As a result, EAP found ways to exclude him and other hard-liners from the policymaking process on North Korea.

By 2006, EAP and Ambassador Christopher Hill, the Bush administration’s North Korea special envoy, were working outside the interagency process to coordinate North Korea policy and to keep the few remaining Bush administration hard-liners in the dark.

This led to some horrendous decisions in the second Bush term that continue to haunt U.S. North Korea policy to this day. They included removing North Korea from a state sponsor of terror list and dropping tough banking sanctions after North Korea conducted its first nuclear test in 2006. Physical evidence was found indicating a secret uranium enrichment program and the North turned over a bogus declaration of its nuclear program.

These concessions set the stage for an even more disastrous North Korea policy by the Obama administration called “Strategic Patience,” which led to a huge surge in the North’s nuclear and missile programs.

The lesson Mr. Trump should draw from the Bolton North Korea speech and related experiences is the urgency of ensuring that his policies are fully implemented by the foreign policy bureaucracy. This is difficult because there is a strong resistance to conservative policies — not just those of the Trump administration — by the “swamp.”

Countering this resistance requires extremely good staffing of senior positions — especially political appointees — at the State Department and the National Security Council. Unfortunately, too many of these posts are vacant or staffed with individuals who oppose the president’s policies and are prepared to obstruct them.

Fortunately, there is hope on the horizon. I believe Mr. Trump will do what most businesses do every December: an end-of-the-year performance review of his presidency. Hopefully, this will lead to major personnel changes and the president reassessing the advice of outside advisers who recommended individuals for senior positions who did not work out.

Such a review is urgently needed to implement the president’s policies and to staff his administration with the personnel to do so. Otherwise, President Trump’s North Korea speech will be undermined and ignored by the “swamp” just like John Bolton’s 2003 speech was.

U.S. Conducts Military Exercises, Increasing Pressure on China

As tensions between the United States and North Korea continue to run high, the United States seek Chinese action on its ally, North Korea.

On October 10th the United States flew two Air Force B-1B bombers and two F-15K fighters  from their base in Guam, over South Korean airspace. The bombers carried out air-to-ground missile drills in the Sea of Japan, before repeating the drill over the East China Sea.

The drills come as the Trump administration has continued to stress the importance of ending North Korean nuclear weapons and ballistic missile progress.

During President Trump’s address to the UN General Assembly in September, he called Kim Jong Un a “rocket man on a suicide mission” and that the U.S. would “totally destroy” North Korea in response to a North Korean attack.  North Korea responded by pledging that it will take the “highest level” action against the United States, alluding to another nuclear test to occur.

On September 3rd North Korea conducted its 6th nuclear test and earlier in August launched two missiles over Japanese air space.   North Korea has threatened to fire intermediate range ballistic missiles near Guam.

The United States has urged the Chinese government to rein in North Korea’s missile and nuclear programs, but Beijing has done little to persuade its problematic ally. As North Korea’s main trading partner, China argues that the sanctions on North Korea alone will not be effective, yet the nation has done little to assist in deterring its neighbor.

The UN recently banned four North Korean ships on October 5th from entering any ports globally for carrying coal from North Korea, including one vessel that also carried ammunition. The ships banned were the Comoros-flagged Petrel 8, St. Kitts and Nevis-flagged Hao Fan 6, North Korean-flagged Tong San 2 and Cambodia-flagged Jie Shun.

This ban was placed due to the violations of previously imposed sanctions, including sanctions on the exportation of coal, seafood, textiles, iron ore, North Korean guest workers, as well as a cap on oil imports.

While the air drills were occurring near China, simultaneously the USS Chafee (DDG 90), a guided-Missile destroyer conducted a “freedom of navigation” operation near islands claimed by China in the South China Sea while.

A “freedom of navigation” operation allows the United States to assert navigation and overflight rights,  consistent in the customary international law of the sea, in order to promote maritime stability.  The United States regularly conducts these operations in the South China Sea, undermining Chinese sovereignty claims.

China’s Defense Ministry called this particular operation a “provocation”, alleging it infringed on Chinese sovereignty, and sent a Type 054A guided missile frigate, a Z-8 helicopter likely equipped with surface search radar, and two J-11B fighter jets, which can be equipped with anti-ship missiles, to identify and confront the U.S. vessel.

The Chinese Defense Ministry in a statement said, “It is a critical stage for the development of the relationship between Chinese and American armies, and we demand the U.S. side earnestly take steps to correct its mistakes and inject positive energy into bilateral ties.”

The statement is an escalation from August, when a U.S. Navy destroyer crossed within 12 nautical miles of an Chinese-built island in the South China Sea. Chinese officials did not make a similar statement at that time.

12 nautical miles marks the internationally recognized territorial limits, sailing within these miles shows that a nation does not recognize territorial claims.

Entering in the South China Sea is not uncommon for the U.S. as it routinely navigates through the territory, however, with the U.S. putting pressure on China to act more toward North Korea this could potentially strain ties.

China claims a “nine dash line”  arranged in a half-circle near Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Malaysia; as well as all sea territory between the dashes including the Parcel and Spratly island chains.  The Paracel Islands is claimed by China, Taiwan and Vietnam, while the Spratly Islands are additionally contested by the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson visited China from September 28th to 30th laying the ground work from President Trump to discuss North Korea as well as trade relations with the U.S.

Trump will be traveling to Japan, South Korea, China, Vietnam and the Philippines from November 3rd to the 14th to discuss North Korea’s growing nuclear threat and other issues. This will be his first visit to the region as president.

North Korean Crisis a Decades-Long Failure of Political Will

Originally posted at Breitbart.com

Center for Security Policy President for Research and Analysis Clare Lopez blamed political mismanagement stretching back for decades, rather than a failure of intelligence-gathering, for the shock of North Korea’s latest nuclear test on Monday’s special Labor Day edition of Breitbart News Daily.

“I suspect – and I don’t know, I’m on the outside, not the inside – that intelligence collection has been quite good,” Lopez told SiriusXM host Raheem Kassam. “What has been lacking in my opinion, over the last decades, in the United States has been a policy response to actually deal with what they were being told the North Koreans were developing, in terms of their nuclear weapons and their intercontinental ballistic missiles.”

Lopez said the disconnect between the urgency of the North Korean threat and the clarity of U.S. policy began in the Clinton administration.

“I think the intelligence was there. They knew what they were doing, but the will to confront it, to actually do something about it, was not there,” she said.

“Confronting North Korea of course means confronting, or at least working with, China, the Beijing government, because they hold such influence and power over really the survival of North Korea, which could not survive without Beijing’s support,” she continued.

“There’s been a reluctance to confront Beijing, but I think that’s now changing. We’re seeing the Trump administration alarmed, certainly, by this latest nuclear test, which appears to have been a hydrogen bomb or thermonuclear bomb test, now going to the extent of saying look – and they don’t specify China particularly – but those trading partners of North Korea, if you don’t cut off trade with them, we will cut off trade with you,” she said.

Lopez described President Trump calling for a trade embargo against any country doing business with North Korea as a “big deal.”

When Kassam asked if the United States could afford an embargo that could lock out both the vast Chinese market and a number of other nations that do considerable business with American companies, Lopez replied, “The question is not so much can we afford, can they afford?”

“Yes, of course we can,” she explained. “It wouldn’t be an easy thing to do. It wouldn’t be an easy step to take. But I think we do have to exhaust all of the other possibilities – diplomatic, commercial – before we go to any kind of a military option, which of course as General Mattis and the Pentagon yesterday made very clear, a military option is on the table. There are military options. They’re not good ones. They’re not the first ones. So we have to exhaust all of these others first.”

Lopez said the United States should try to work with its allies, especially fellow members of the U.N. Security Council, but “the bottom line is, North Korea now threatens the continental United States.”

“The United States of America does not need to have the permission of our allies to defend this country,” she declared. “I think that’s what General Mattis was making very clear. We would love to have the support of our allies and friends, certainly the U.N., the U.N. Security Council. There was a unanimous decision taken the last time, the last test, when the missile test was done, to impose harsher, stronger sanctions against North Korea. That’s all well and good. But when it comes right down to it, if that regime in Pyongyang is threatening the continental United States with deliverable nuclear weapons on the tip of an ICBM, then the United States defends itself.”

Kassam asked if it was embarrassing for the Trump administration to see North Korea proceeding with nuclear and missile tests after President Trump’s “fire and fury” warning.

“No, not at all, because we’re not there yet,” Lopez replied. “As I said, there is a whole series of possible measures beginning with the commercial, beginning with diplomatic, that can be ratcheted up as required.”

“We talked about that military option. That’s very clearly there. But it’s also very clearly not the first option, not the preferred option at all. But it’s there, it’s real, and according to General Mattis and the other senior officials in the Trump administration, that will be the final option if all of the others fail,” she said.

As for China, Lopez said Beijing “needs to understand that the continued development by the North Koreans of deliverable nuclear weapons, and now possibly a thermonuclear weapon, an H-bomb,” is an unacceptable threat to American and regional security.

“They’ve already demonstrated the ICBM capability to reach the United States,” she pointed out. “By the way, I don’t know if most Americans know this or others either, North Korea already right now has two satellites orbiting over the United States on a south polar trajectory,” she added. “One went up in 2012, one last year, 2016. We don’t know what’s on board those satellites. They are of a size that could potentially hold an EMP electromagnetic pulse weapon that could potentially, possibly, be detonated remotely with a radio signal at a time of Pyongyang’s choosing,” she warned.

“So if these threats continue, Beijing needs to understand that the United States will defend ourselves, and this will be far worse in consequence for China, for the people of China, than were they to take steps right now to help us rein in the Pyongyang regime,” said Lopez.

“Obviously China fears destabilization, a refugee flow across their borders from North Korea,” she acknowledged. “Those threats are far less of concern than what would happen if we get to the point that the United States has to actually make good on its pledge to defend the American people from a North Korean military threat, from a nuclear threat.”

On North Korea, ‘Strategic Patience’ Has Enabled Strategic Blackmail

Originally posted at Breitbart.com

When Barack Obama handed off to his successor the presidency of the United States, he impressed upon Donald Trump that his greatest worry was North Korea.

The intervening months have made clear why – with dictator Kim Jong-un’s incessant ballistic missile tests of ever-more-formidable weapons, his sixth underground explosion on Sunday apparently of a thermonuclear weapon and his escalating threats, which now include explicitly an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack on America’s vulnerable electric grid.

Equally apparent is the fact this witches’ brew of trouble is befalling the United States on President Trump’s watch because the Obama administration basically did nothing to attenuate the danger. Instead, it dressed up inactivity and passivity in the face of the metastasizing danger as “strategic patience.”

Even before the North Koreans’ latest intercontinental missile launches, nuclear test, and threat of an EMP attack, Mr. Trump and his senior subordinates have properly signaled that the era of strategic patience is at an end. Unfortunately, in the absence of urgent course corrections on several fronts, the period now dawning is likely to be one of strategic blackmail.

While fecklessness towards the emerging North Korean threat characterized the Clinton and Bush ’43 administrations, we find ourselves needlessly exposed to its present magnitude in no small measure because Obama’s so-called strategic patience was characterized by inaction on two, vital fronts: advancing the U.S. missile defense capabilities and protecting the grid against electromagnetic pulse and other perils.

Barack Obama and his subordinates brought to office a visceral enmity towards missile defense, born of an ideological attachment to the obsolete Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the Soviet Union, which prevented the United States from having any effective anti-missile systems. While George W. Bush formally withdrew us from the ABM Treaty in 2002, the capabilities of such defenses as have been put into place have been deliberately limited – so much so that they were reportedly not up to the task of shooting down the ballistic missile Pyongyang fired over Japan last week.

Similarly, Team Obama was convinced that it would rid the world of nuclear weapons and so declined to take seriously, let alone do anything appreciable about, the danger that one or more detonated outside the atmosphere over the United States could destroy our most critical of critical infrastructures: the electric grid. Late in his presidency, Mr. Obama did evince concern about a similar, nation-ending effect being caused by intense solar storms, but did little to make the grid resilient against that source of destructive electromagnetic pulses, either.

If Mr. Trump is to avoid being held hostage by North Korean blackmail or, worse yet, seeing Kim Jong Un act on his oft-stated determination to destroy our country, the President must immediately undertake two steps:

  • First, in May, Rep. Trent Franks advised the President of the availability of a predictive algorithm that – based upon years of testing, including on the Army’s classified PAC-3 anti-missile simulator – could promptly and significantly enhance the capabilities of existing, as well as future, anti-missile systems. Confirming the effectiveness of this software, known as the Hypersonic Intercept Technology, and bringing it to bear against both North Korean threats and those now emerging from Russia and China (which include advanced hypersonic and maneuvering missiles designed to defeat our present missile defenses) must be given the highest priority.
  • Second, the President has already pledged to upgrade America’s critical infrastructure. The imperative of protecting the nation’s bulk-power distribution system, better known as “the grid,” must now take precedence over other improvements. The U.S. military has known for decades how to “harden” electrical and electronic gear from EMP. These techniques must now be applied on an emergency basis to ensure that the civilian grid – upon which both our armed forces and our population and economy critically depend – is made as invulnerable as possible to enemy action.

A first step would be to extend the life of the Congressional EMP Threat Commission – the nation’s foremost authorities on the sorts of menace now explicitly posed by the North Korean government. As things stand now, its existing mandate will end in less than a month and the Commission’s expertise is needed now more than ever. The next step is to implement, at last, the recommendations this panel has been making for 13 years concerning practical, near-term and affordable steps to enhance the resiliency of our electric infrastructure.

This is a moment when the Congress must stand united with President Trump in resisting the inevitable blackmailing to come from North Korea by doing everything practicable to defeat Pyongyang’s missile threats and deny Kim Jong-Un his ultimate instrument of extortion by securing our grid.

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. acted as an Assistant Secretary of Defense in the Reagan administration. He is President of the Center for Security Policy.

Some Initial Thoughts on North Korea’s Latest Nuclear Test

Early today, North Korea conducted its sixth and most powerful nuclear test.   North Korea claims this was a test of an H-bomb that can be placed on an ICBM.  Based on seismic data, early estimates put this test’s yield at 50 to 120 kilotons.  Some experts claim the yield may have been 1 megaton (1,000 kilotons), although this estimate seems to be an outlier.

Just before the test, the North Korean media released a photo of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un inspecting a supposed H-bomb.

Concerning the yield of this test, there will be a wide range of estimates because it is difficult to accurately assess a nuclear test’s yield using only remotely-collected seismic data due to a variety of unknown variables such as depth of the test, the nature of the rock that the seismic wave traveled through and the degree to which the device was coupled to rock.

While this was much a more powerful nuclear test, I doubt North Korea has mastered the complex technology to construct a hydrogen bomb.  I also agree with several experts  who believe the so-called H-bomb that Kim posed with was probably a crude model.  Its worth noting that North Korea also boasted about testing an H-bomb in January 2016.  

I believe this nuclear device was probably a boosted-fission nuclear bomb which used a small fusion reaction to significantly increase the bomb’s fission reaction.  North Korea might inaccurately call such a device an H-bomb.  

The radioactive gas Argon-37 is a telltale sign of an H-bomb test.  If U.S. “air sniffer” planes and other testing stations detect this gas, an H-bomb test could be confirmed.  North Korea appears to have successfully contained the release of such gases in most of its prior nuclear tests.  However, the size of this test and the possibility that it created a crater may mean that radioactive gases were released which will allow international experts to determine the nature of this nuclear test.  
Finally, this nuclear test probably was greatly embarrassing to China, especially since Chinese  President Xi was scheduled to meet with Russian President Putin in Beijing today.  This may allow the passage of much harsher UN Security Council sanctions against North Korea such as an oil embargo and cutting the North off from the international financial system.  The United States also must consider sanctioning Chinese banks and other entities that have been violating existing UN sanctions on North Korea.

— Fred Fleitz served in national-security positions for 25 years with the CIA, the DIA, the State Department, and the House Intelligence Committee staff. He is now senior vice president with the Center for Security Policy, a national-security think tank.  Fleitz is the author of a 2016 book on the nuclear deal with Iran, “Obamabomb: A Dangerous and Growing National Security Fraud.”

North Korean missile over Japanese airspace and the implications for the U.S.

On August 29th, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) fired a Hwasong-12 missile over northern Japanese airspace landing in the Pacific Ocean. The missile launch traveled around 1,677 miles and reached a height of 341 miles.

The Hwasong-12 missile was designed to carry a nuclear payload, however, there was no reported damage from the launch in Japan or the surrounding area.  The Hwasong-12 missile is currently the longest-range missile tested by North Korea, and in full deployment it can reach around 2,800 miles. This would be able to reach Alaska.

North Korea is reported to have two other long-range missiles which would be able to travel the distance to New York City, however, these have yet to be tested. These long-range weapons known as the Hwasong-14 and Taepodong-2 may be tested in the near future, as North Korea continues to ramp up missile tests in violation of U.N Security Council Resolution 2371.

This test not only sets a future precedent that the DPRK intends on future launches, but also increasingly poses a greater threat, initially Guam, but also the continental United States.

Within this past year the DPRK’s provocative messages to the United States, Japan, and the Republic of Korea, have heightened tensions as they continue testing larger ICBMs. This is the 14th missile test from North Korea in this past year alone.

On August 14th Kim Jong-un threatened to strike Guam but backed down as tension and pressure from the U.S. escalated. Guam is strategically important for the United States with two military bases, Andersen Air Force Base and Naval Base Guam, it holds one of the largest weapon reserves for the U.S. military.

August 25th North Korea tested three short-range ballistic missiles to the northeast, two of which flew about 155 miles, and one of which blew up immediately. These recent missile tests are in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 2371 and raises a great concern for the U.S. to keep an eye on.

Although provisions from UN Security Council Resolution 2371 imposed new sanctions on North Korea after staging two long-range missile launches in July, it is unlikely that this will resolve the majority of the issues. From the tests in August, North Korea has not suspended activities related to their ballistic missile program.

While the White House preferred means of approach is diplomacy, there is an alternative answer for future North Korea missile launches, shoot them down.

The U.S. Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) located in South Korea is a missile system which targets incoming ballistic missiles in their final phase of flight. THAAD is intended to shoot down small, medium, and intermediate ballistic missiles and has a senor range of about 1,240 miles.

Deploying THAAD systems in the region is not without controversy however.

THAAD sensors deployed in South Korea can reach into parts of China and Russia as well. Both states worry that the radar will invade their territory and compromise their security.

U.S. allies look on the deployments more favorably however. Deploying two of these THAAD systems would allow for substantial regional coverage to protect U.S. allies, including South Korea, Japan, as well as the U.S. territory of Guam.

Following this Tuesday’s missile launch Japanese’s Prime Minster Shinzo Abe released a statement condemning the DPRK actions. The Japanese and American governments both are committed to putting pressure on North Korea, to stop testing missiles before the situation escalates.

Japan currently is considering on installing a similar system, Aegis Ashore, which would cost less for the Japanese government, but work at a similar range capacity. The Japanese plan to incorporate this system into their 2018 budget.

As North Korea looks to improve its ballistic missile capability the Trump Administration should consider working with allies to expand missile defense coverage in the region under threat from North Korea’s missile capacity.

Why North Korea’s Nuclear and Missile Programs Are Far More Dangerous Than They Look

Originally published at National Review

On Friday, the news media were so sure North Korea would conduct a nuclear test over the weekend to celebrate the 105th birthday of Kim Il-Sung that they almost started a countdown clock. The test never happened. Some experts said this was because President Trump caused North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to “blink.”

On Saturday, North Korea did attempt a celebratory ballistic-missile test, which failed seconds after launch. There has been speculation in the media that this failure was due to U.S. sabotage, possibly a cyberattack.

While I believe the above explanations of both events are unlikely, North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs still pose serious and growing threats because they represent an unstable regime developing and testing increasingly advanced WMDs based on poor engineering and badly inadequate R&D. This is why a new U.S. approach to the threat from North Korea is long overdue.

I did not believe a nuclear test would occur as part of North Korea’s weekend celebration. I was not convinced by commercial-satellite imagery cited by some experts as evidence of an imminent nuclear test, since there is constant activity at North Korea’s nuclear test site that often leads to predictions of nuclear tests that do not occur. On the other hand, when North Korea actually conducts nuclear tests, these same experts are usually caught off guard.

Predicting North Korean nuclear tests is difficult, because Pyongyang is aware it is being watched by U.S. spy satellites. North Korea probably engages in subterfuge at its test site to make the world think nuclear tests are imminent when they are not, and to conceal preparations for actual tests.

North Korean nuclear tests during major celebrations like the 105th birthday of Kim Il-Sung are unlikely because, as North Korea’s nuclear program becomes more sophisticated, the chances of failed tests increase. North Korean leaders probably wanted to avoid the humiliation of a failed nuclear test on an important holiday when the eyes of the world were fixed on the Hermit Kingdom.

There also is a more likely and simpler explanation for North Korea’s April 15 missile test and its subsequent failure. North Korean officials probably decided to conduct a missile test as a demonstration of their nation’s military might that had a higher likelihood of success than a nuclear test.

While some experts are speculating the missile test failed because of U.S. sabotage or cyber warfare, the more likely explanation is that the failure was due to the poor state of North Korean science and engineering. Arms-control expert Jeffrey Lewis is “deeply skeptical” that the U.S. was responsible for the failed missile test, and he said in a recent Axios.com interview, “The failures we’ve seen are better explained by the pains of the R&D process. There is a reason that ‘rocket science’ is a metaphor for something that is hard to do.”

About 50 percent of North Korean missile tests — and 88 percent of its intermediate Musudan missile tests — have failed. This is what happens when a brutal totalitarian regime tries to pursue a complex weapons program using borrowed and stolen technology and relies on third-rate scientists.

It goes without saying that the world’s leading experts in rocketry and physics are not flocking to North Korea to work on the WMD programs of an evil totalitarian regime with a serious job-security problem — Leader Kim may have you executed if your project encounters failures or setbacks.

North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs prove the old adage “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” The research-and-engineering deficiencies of these weapon programs make them more dangerous and unpredictable, since this unstable rogue nation is rapidly developing increasingly advanced WMD technologies that its scientists may not fully understand and have been poorly designed. This increases the chances of a catastrophic accident, possibly when an ICBM test goes off course and strikes a neighboring country.

Moreover, more powerful North Korean underground nuclear tests could accidentally release large amounts of radioactive gases that could threaten neighboring states. According to former director of Los Alamos National Laboratory Siegfried Hecker, “one of the risks Pyongyang takes in trying to demonstrate a [nuclear] test at a higher level is that they may produce fissures that allow radioactive seepage or possibly cause a major blowout from the tunnel.”

Only North Korea’s leaders know exactly how advanced their nuclear-weapons program is. It does appear, based on seismic data after previous North Korean nuclear tests, that its nuclear devices are increasing in yield. The world must assume the worst: that North Korea’s nuclear-weapons program is making rapid advances in developing more powerful nuclear warheads that will eventually be mounted on missiles, including ICBMs capable of hitting the United States.

Similarly, despite setbacks in its ballistic-missile program, there are signs that Pyongyang is accelerating this effort and making significant progress. While the parade of missiles and missile canisters displayed over the weekend in Pyongyang may have included mockups of missiles that are not operational or empty canisters, the parade included what appeared to be two brand-new ICBMs and solid-fueled intermediate-range missiles that can be launched quickly and are easy to hide. The submarine-launched KN-11 missile also was displayed; it could pose a serious threat to Japan and South Korea.

The short- to medium-term risks from North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs probably will not be ICBMs carrying nuclear warheads fired at the United States. They are more likely to stem from catastrophic failures of missile or nuclear tests.

North Korean long-range missile tests will be especially provocative, since the United States and regional states may try to shoot them down out of concern that these missiles could accidentally strike a neighboring state and because they cannot be sure they are not North Korean attacks. This could spark North Korean retaliation and a dangerous military confrontation.

A future underground North Korean nuclear test that vents significant amounts of radioactive gases might be a game changer and could fundamentally change Beijing’s approach to the North Korean nuclear program if these gases drift over Chinese territory. The Trump administration must explain this possibility to Beijing, and why it must act before such a disaster occurs.

North Korea has learned over the last 25 years that developing, testing, and threating to attack with nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles is a successful strategy to extort concessions from the international community in exchange for pretending to halt these programs. I believe the Trump administration understands that the Kim regime’s missile and nuclear programs are becoming too dangerous to allow this pattern of appeasement to continue. Hopefully China also realizes this too, and will begin cooperating with the United States to implement more aggressive steps to pressure Pyongyang to halt these programs and work with Washington on the only real solution to the North Korean problem: regime change.

North Korea Faces Missile Test Setback

On Tuesday, May 31st, South Korean officials announced that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) had failed in an attempt to launch a ballistic missile from the eastern city of Wonsan. US reports suggested that the missile was an intermediate-range Musudan capable of carrying a nuclear payload, and if confirmed, the missile test would be the fourth failed attempt since the nation started to outwardly pursue this technology.

Although North Korea has had numerous missile failures, they have also had some successes in launching both intermediate and short-range ballistic missiles. One such success included the launching of a satellite in February of this year.  Evidence of these accomplishments, and even some failures, demonstrate the continuing corrections and adaptations of North Korean technology.

Alongside missile tests, North Korea has revealed numerous sources that indicate they have nuclear weapons. As recent as January 6th, 2016, North Korean media outlets claimed to have successfully tested a hydrogen bomb. South Korea confirmed artificial earthquakes in the area and some evidence of radioactive debris was collected from the atmosphere surrounding the test site. Former CIA analyst and Center for Security Policy Fellow Fred Fleitz noted at the time that while the detonation was unlikely to have been a hydrogen bomb, the test still showed signs of research progress by the North Koreans.

As North Korea continues to operate against the wishes of the international community, both Japan and South Korea have increased the level of alert for their missile defense systems. Even China, largely regarded as North Korea’s sole ally, has expressed concern over Kim Jong Un’s lack of restraint.

For years, North Korea has been criticized by western nations for its adherence to inhumane and aggressive policies toward both its citizens and neighbors. The United Nations has repeatedly embargoed the country’s trade networks to limit technological, industrial, and economic growth. Yet, the most recent missile test is evidence that, despite failures and setbacks along the way, North Korea refuses to give up in its attempts to solidify its nuclear capabilities.

South Korea Braces for Potential Terrorism Attack from North Korea

On February 18, 2016, a ruling party lawmaker from North Korea had stated that President Kim Jong-Un has ordered the regime’s intelligence agencies to concentrate their abilities and assets for potential terrorist attacks on South Korea.

The South Korean Saenuri Party and President Park Geun-hye’s administration held an emergency meeting Thursday morning to further discuss the situation. The National Intelligence Services (NIS) briefed the ruling party and other government agencies about North Korea’s actions.

According to the NIS’ findings North Korea may be preparing to target anti-North Korean activists, defectors, or government officials. Journalists critical of the Kim Jong-Un regime could also be targeted. NIS believes techniques used on activists and defectors could include poisoning and kidnappings.

NIS also pointed out to potential attacks on critical infrastructure that included wastewater treatment and power plants. NIS report also warned against potential threats to public facilities like shopping malls and subways.

The threat to South Korea is mostly likely to be to responsibility of North Korea’s Reconnaissance General Bureau, which has targeted South Korea in the past. The bureau is responsible for deadly attacks including: the sinking of a Chenoa warship; attempted assassination of high profile defector Hwang Jang-Yop; and the shelling of Yeonpyeong Island. In 2010 the RGB conducted a general reorganization that Korea specialists warned might represent preparations to a shift towards greater activity.

While not directly connected to the RGB, in March of last year a South Korean activist with ties to North Korea assaulted the U.S. Ambassador, slashing his face with a knife.

South Korea has vowed to take action in the wake of North Korea’s testing of a supposed hydrogen bomb and recent missile test, which occurred under the cover of a satellite launch. Both of which are violations of UN Security Council resolutions.

On February 7, 2016, the same day that North Korea had launched their satellite, South Korea contacted Washington, D.C. and notified them of their desire to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), which is used to help combat short and medium range missile attacks.

In an effort to pressure North Korea economically, South Korea broke off cooperation with the North and shut down the Kaesong Industrial Complex, one of the few legal methods for the isolated Pyonyang regime to acquire hard currency. In retaliation, North Korea ordered all South Korean workers expelled, seized their property, cut off all lines of communication with the south.

South Korean President Geun-hye has stressed the importance of passing key anti-terrorism legislation. Despite multiple legislative proposals under a number of South Korean administrations, no anti-terror legislation has ever successfully to a vote, likely the result of concerns such a bill would provide too much power to the intelligence services, which do have a history of interference with domestic politics.

The United States finds itself in the middle of this conflict but is committed to maintaining the safety of South Korea. The United States has provided 15,000 additional troops to help conduct military drill this scheduled for March 7, 2016. North Korea routinely claims that such military exercise drills are a ploy for an eventual northward invasion led by the U.S.

North Korea’s history says it is capable of anything against its southern neighbor even when fully supported by the United States. If the NIS’ prediction of increased North Korean terror activity is accurate, which seems likely, it may be the impetus the South Korean government needs to push its anti-terrorism legislation through to approval.