The Case for War

At RealClearDefense Crispin Rovere articulates the case for immediate war against North Korea. His Consequence 1 of Option 2 (war) is about what I’d expect from the U. S. going to war against North Korea:

North Korea is hit by a massive cyber-attack that disables communications, shuts down the power grid, and cripples command and control chains. Minutes later the sky lights up with massive ordinance as MOABs detonate over North Korean nuclear facilities and launch platforms. Thousands of North Korean artillery pieces are similarly struck, along with all palatial compounds. By the time the attack is generally known in Pyongyang, North Korea’s forces have already been seriously degraded. Eventually, low-level commanders acting under their own initiative commence an un-coordinated retaliatory action primarily targeted at Seoul. The subsequent artillery barrage kills some 30,000 people before the guns are found and destroyed. After these initial setbacks, North Korea is given some time to re-group as the American air campaign focuses obsessively on suspected nuclear sites. 36 hours later North Korea retaliates with a massive ballistic missile bombardment of Japan, killing thousands. Meanwhile, North Korean submarines attack American surface ships, somewhat complicating carrier-based sorties over the peninsula. Using hitherto undetected tunnels, thousands of North Korean troops appear south of the DMZ. They are pushed back with heavy losses on both sides, as huge numbers of marines arrive in preparation for an invasion of the North.

I’d add an EMP attack to the cyber-attack and wouldn’t limit myself to the targets he lists but that sounds like the way it would unfold to me. His emphasis is on downside risk but he concludes with an analysis of upside gain:

This analysis has rightly focused on the negative consequences of each decision; however, it is necessary to also assess potential benefits. With Option One there are none. But war would: prove that nuclear weapons do not confer unfettered license to threaten world peace, unify an artificially divided people, and extinguish a regime that is an affront to the human race. Moreover, depending on how it progressed, the war could bolster America’s long-term position in Asia by proving America’s ability to sustain high-intensity operations in the Western Pacific and giving China pause.

I wouldn’t start a war with North Korea at this point. However, I would take actions that the North Koreans would very likely respond to by starting a war with us. There are only bad and worse options in this situation.

If you hadn’t guessed it from his forename, Mr. Rovere is an Aussie. I didn’t think he argued his position as an American would.