Noting the litany of those calling for a punitive strike against North Korea, at Foreign Policy Luke O’Brien provides a convincing analysis of just how foolhardy that would be:
If the United States keeps operating under flawed assumptions about the North, it could lead to a strike that, at best, will not end North Korea’s WMD program and, at worst, might provoke an escalation that results in the first battlefield use of nuclear weapons since 1945. The in-between possibilities are equally unattractive: limited retaliations that threaten the United States and its allies, and target civilians and military alike? A wider war on the Korean peninsula? No war, but allies that are forced to re-evaluate their own security relationships in the wake of a massive U.S. miscalculation? None of these can be said to be in the United States’ best interest.
Most of all, we don’t have to take these risks at all. If the perception of Kim Jong Un is one of a rogue and irrational actor, then striking now is far more prudent because deterrence likely will not hold. Of course, everything we see indicates that Kim is rational. North Korea is absolutely deterrable. And since it is, striking based on a misplaced trust in our own power is a dangerous — and unnecessary — risk.
And that’s without even a hint that such a course of action might well draw China or Russia into the conflict. I genuinely don’t know what these people are thinking.
Something that should be considered more seriously is just how fragile the Kim regime is. Politically, it cannot accept a limited attack without striking back any better than it could tolerate a U. S. invasion. The very forces that are driving the Kim regime to seek nuclear weapons refute the notion that a limited strike could be effective.
It depends why it was ordered.
In response to a South Korean submarine sinking or shelling of South Korea with casualties (both of which happened in the last 15 years). Or a missile test that goes wrong and lands in Japan?
In those cases I think the Chinese and Russians would consider it very lucky that the North Koreans only got a bloody nose – and I don’t think something like that deserves Armageddon right away.
As usual, the people calling for these strikes are court poseurs who have no actual experience in such matters much less any skin in the game. I don’t regret the use of ad hominem in this case – sometimes a fool needs to be called a fool.
Over a month ago, both China and Russia stated they would help North Korea if we attacked it. What that help would be is open to question, but I don’t think we should test them. The last time a Chinese army that did not have enough rifles for all its troops drove us from the Yalu to the current DMZ, which was the boundary originally negotiated with the USSR.
Many of the people promoting war with North Korea are also pushing to arm the Kurds along the Turkish border. That risks the loss of a critical ally, and it might result in Turkey switching from NATO to Russia. A Turkish-Russian alliance would control the Black Sea and its litoral, and countries like Ukraine, Georgia and Romania would be forced into the Russian sphere.
The people in charge of the Pentagon and State Department are delusional, and they are a direct threat to the American people.