#U.S.-North Korea relations

[treethymes]

With the exceptions of North Korea and Cuba, the communist world has merged onto the capitalist highway in a couple different ways during the twenty-first century. As you’ve read, free-trade imperialism and its cheap agricultural imports pushed farmers into the cities and into factory work, lowering the global price of manufacturing labor and glutting the world market with stuff. Forward-thinking states such as China and Vietnam invested in high-value-added production capacity and managed labor organizing, luring links from the global electronics supply chain and jump-starting capital investment. Combined with capital’s hesitancy to invest in North Atlantic production facilities, as well as a disinclination toward state-led investment in the region, Asian top-down planning erased much of the West’s technological edge. If two workers can do a single job, and one worker costs less, both in wages and state support, why pick the expensive one? Foxconn’s 2017 plan to build a U.S. taxpayer–subsidized $10 billion flat-panel display factory in Wisconsin was trumpeted by the president, but it was a fiasco that produced zero screens. The future cost of labor looks to be capped somewhere below the wage levels many people have enjoyed, and not just in the West.

The left-wing economist Joan Robinson used to tell a joke about poverty and investment, something to the effect of: The only thing worse than being exploited by capitalists is not being exploited by capitalists. It’s a cruel truism about the unipolar world, but shouldn’t second place count for something? When the Soviet project came to an end, in the early 1990s, the country had completed world history’s biggest, fastest modernization project, and that didn’t just disappear. Recall that Cisco was hyped to announce its buyout of the Evil Empire’s supercomputer team. Why wasn’t capitalist Russia able to, well, capitalize? You’re already familiar with one of the reasons: The United States absorbed a lot of human capital originally financed by the Soviet people. American immigration policy was based on draining technical talent in particular from the Second World. Sergey Brin is the best-known person in the Moscow-to-Palo-Alto pipeline, but he’s not the only one.

Look at the economic composition of China and Russia in the wake of Soviet dissolution: Both were headed toward capitalist social relations, but they took two different routes. The Russian transition happened rapidly. The state sold off public assets right away, and the natural monopolies such as telecommunications and energy were divided among a small number of skilled and connected businessmen, a category of guys lacking in a country that frowned on such characters but that grew in Gorbachev’s liberalizing perestroika era. Within five years, the country sold off an incredible 35 percent of its national wealth. Russia’s richest ended the century with a full counterrevolutionary reversal of their fortunes, propelling their income share above what it was before the Bolsheviks took over. To accomplish this, the country’s new capitalists fleeced the most vulnerable half of their society. “Over the 1989–2016 period, the top 1 percent captured more than two-thirds of the total growth in Russia,” found an international group of scholars, “while the bottom 50 percent actually saw a decline in its income.” Increases in energy prices encouraged the growth of an extractionist petro-centered economy. Blood-covered, teary, and writhing, infant Russian capital crowded into the gas and oil sectors. The small circle of oligarchs privatized unemployed KGB-trained killers to run “security,” and gangsters dominated politics at the local and national levels. They installed a not particularly well-known functionary—a former head of the new intelligence service FSB who also worked on the privatization of government assets—as president in a surprise move on the first day of the year 2000. He became the gangster in chief.

Vladimir Putin’s first term coincided with the energy boom, and billionaires gobbled up a ludicrous share of growth. If any individual oligarch got too big for his britches, Putin was not beyond imposing serious consequences. He reinserted the state into the natural monopolies, this time in collaboration with loyal capitalists, and his stranglehold on power remains tight for now, despite the outstandingly uneven distribution of growth. Between 1980 and 2015, the Russian top 1 percent grew its income an impressive 6.2 percent per year, but the top .001 percent has maintained a growth rate of 17 percent over the same period. To invest these profits, the Russian billionaires parked their money in real estate, bidding up housing prices, and stashed a large amount of their wealth offshore. Reinvestment in Russian production was not a priority—why go through the hassle when there were easier ways to keep getting richer?

While Russia grew billionaires instead of output, China saw a path to have both. As in the case of Terry Gou, the Chinese Communist Party tempered its transition by incorporating steadily increasing amounts of foreign direct investment through Hong Kong and Taiwan, picking partners and expanding outward from the special economic zones. State support for education and infrastructure combined with low wages to make the mainland too attractive to resist. (Russia’s population is stagnant, while China’s has grown quickly.) China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, in 2001, gave investors more confidence. Meanwhile, strong capital controls kept the country out of the offshore trap, and state development priorities took precedence over extraction and get-rich-quick schemes. Chinese private wealth was rechanneled into domestic financial assets—equity and bonds or other loan instruments—at a much higher rate than it was in Russia. The result has been a sustained high level of annual output growth compared to the rest of the world, the type that involves putting up an iPhone City in a matter of months. As it has everywhere else, that growth has been skewed: only an average of 4.5 percent for the bottom half of earners in the 1978–2015 period compared to more than 10 percent for the top .001 percent. But this ratio of just over 2–1 is incomparable to Russia’s 17–.5 ration during the same period.

Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, certain trends have been more or less unavoidable. The rich have gotten richer relative to the poor and working class—in Russia, in China, in the United States, and pretty much anywhere else you want to look. Capital has piled into property markets, driving up the cost of housing everywhere people want to live, especially in higher-wage cities and especially in the world’s financial centers. Capitalist and communist countries alike have disgorged public assets into private pockets. But by maintaining a level of control over the process and slowing its tendencies, the People’s Republic of China has built a massive and expanding postindustrial manufacturing base.

It’s important to understand both of these patterns as part of the same global system rather than as two opposed regimes. One might imagine, based on what I’ve written so far, that the Chinese model is useful, albeit perhaps threatening, in the long term for American tech companies while the Russian model is irrelevant. Some commentators have phrased this as the dilemma of middle-wage countries on the global market: Wages in China are going to be higher than wages in Russia because wages in Russia used to be higher than wages in China. But Russia’s counterrevolutionary hyper-bifurcation has been useful for Silicon Valley as well; they are two sides of the same coin. Think about it this way: If you’re a Russian billionaire in the first decades of the twenty-first century looking to invest a bunch of money you pulled out of the ground, where’s the best place you could put it? The answer is Palo Alto.

Malcolm Harris, Palo Alto

[odinsblog]

Usually, when refugees flee an oppressive regime, they know what they’re leaving behind; they can taste the freedom they’re searching for. But part of the story “Beyond Utopia” tells is that the citizens of North Korea don’t fully understand how oppressed they are. They can’t; they’ve never seen any other way of being.

In that sense, apart from Nazi Germany, the country that North Korea most resembles is Mao’s China during the insanity of the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward. Tens of millions of people died in China from famine, due to Mao’s disastrously unhinged economic policies. In the aftermath, partly to cover all that up, China became the first National Propaganda Media State, subjecting its vast populace to a daily brainwashing, with Mao held up as a living deity.

The North Korean regime, in many ways a depraved outgrowth of Maoism, goes even further. As the film shows us, it has taken its made-up theology from the Bible, with Kim Jong-un portrayed as a Christ figure, and we see footage of the great mass stadium exhibitions that the citizens, including thousands of schoolchildren, rehearse for a year at a time — displays that look like the opening ceremony of the Olympics staged on a mile-wide electronic billboard in which every LED light is a choreographed human being. All of this loony-tunes spectacle is meant to celebrate the “utopia” of North Korea, with the outside world, especially America, portrayed as such a demonic place that the only word used to refer to someone in the U.S. is “American-bastard.”

The joyless suppression of life in North Korea prompts at least some citizens to suspect that a better life must lay on the other side. The family of defectors in “Beyond Utopia” are like that; they’re ordinary people who have put themselves on a moving mission.

(continue reading) related ←

#politics #beyond utopia #north korea #kim jung un #brainwashing #n korea #authoritarianism #documentaries #authoritarian dictatorships #mao tse tung #mao zedong #totalitarianism #maoism

[tomorrowusa]

Russian state media loves "Moscow Marjorie" Taylor Traitor Greene. They undoubtedly hope that her attempt to oust Speaker Johnson creates chaos and prevents the already overdo aid package to Ukraine from passing.

The Russian government is engaged in an effort to destabilize and weaken liberal democracies. Greene fits in nicely with their plans.

Secret Russian foreign policy document urges action to weaken the U.S.

In a classified addendum to Russia’s official — and public — “Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation,” the ministry calls for an “offensive information campaign” and other measures spanning “the military-political, economic and trade and informational psychological spheres” against a “coalition of unfriendly countries” led by the United States. “We need to continue adjusting our approach to relations with unfriendly states,” states the 2023 document, which was provided to The Washington Post by a European intelligence service. “It’s important to create a mechanism for finding the vulnerable points of their external and internal policies with the aim of developing practical steps to weaken Russia’s opponents.” The document for the first time provides official confirmation and codification of what many in the Moscow elite say has become a hybrid war against the West. Russia is seeking to subvert Western support for Ukraine and disrupt the domestic politics of the United States and European countries, through propaganda campaigns supporting isolationist and extremist policies, according to Kremlin documents previously reported on by The Post. It is also seeking to refashion geopolitics, drawing closer to China, Iran and North Korea in an attempt to shift the current balance of power.

Just a quick word to point out that Putin is under the delusion that his Axis of Authoritarians would have Russia as its head. China is stronger than Russia and will not kowtow to a country which has a GDP not much bigger than Italy's and is suffering enormous losses in a war with a country which has only a quarter of Russia's population.

Using much tougher and blunter language than the public foreign policy document, the secret addendum, dated April 11, 2023, claims that the United States is leading a coalition of “unfriendly countries” aimed at weakening Russia because Moscow is “a threat to Western global hegemony.” The document says the outcome of Russia’s war in Ukraine will “to a great degree determine the outlines of the future world order,” a clear indication that Moscow sees the result of its invasion as inextricably bound with its ability — and that of other authoritarian nations — to impose its will globally.

In addition to old school revanchism, Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine is a test to see how far the liberal democracies will let Putin go.

For Mikhail Khodorkovsky — the longtime Putin critic who was once Russia’s richest man until a clash with the Kremlin landed him 10 years in prison — it is not surprising that Russia is seeking to do everything it can to undermine the United States. “For Putin, it is absolutely natural that he should try to create the maximum number of problems for the U.S.,” he said. “The task is to take the U.S. out of the game, and then destroy NATO. This doesn’t mean dissolving it, but to create the feeling among people that NATO isn’t defending them.” The long congressional standoff on providing more weapons to Ukraine was only making it easier for Russia to challenge Washington’s global power, he said. “The Americans consider that insofar as they are not directly participating in the war [in Ukraine], then any loss is not their loss,” Khodorkovsky said. “This is an absolute misunderstanding.”

Putin was taken aback by both Ukraine's fierce defense and by Western resolve to protect the independence of a European democratic state. He refuses to admit that he made an enormous blunder so he continues to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of Russians while hoping that his US servants like Greene, Gaetz, and Trump will rescue him.

#marjorie taylor greene #moscow marjorie #dupe of putin #russia #vladimir putin #russian hegemony #invasion of ukraine #subverting western support for uktaine #nato #russian attempts to undermine liberal democracies #democracy vs. dictatorship #stand with ukraine #ukraine aid now #агрессивная война россии #русский реваншизм #русский мiръ #москва марджори #владимир путин #путин хуйло #мясные волны #союз постсоветских клептократических ватников #путин – это лжедмитрий iv а не пётр великий #руки прочь от украины! #геть з україни #вторгнення оркостану в україну #слава україні! #героям слава!

[usafphantom2]

B-2 stealth bomber will fly over the Rose Parade again after absence last year

Fernando Valduga By Fernando Valduga 12/31/2023 - 12:30 in Military

B-2 Spirit bomber flies over the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California, on January 1º 2019. (Photo: Mark Holtzman)

USAF's B-2 Spirit stealth bomber is making its big return to the annual Rose Tournament parade after a brief hiatus in the celebration.

The Rose Parade, held in Pasadena, California, to celebrate the New Year, will resume the bomber's overflying tradition during the 2024 parade. The aircraft had to miss last year's event after an aircraft caught fire in flight.

A B-2 Spirit from Whiteman Air Base, Missouri, opens the 108º Rose Bowl game in Pasadena, California, on January 1º 2022. (Photo: Sgt. Coach Dylan Nuckolls/U.S. Air Force)

"We are excited to return to the 2024 Rose Bowl," Colonel Keith Butler, commander of the 509ª Bomber Wing at Whiteman Air Base, said in an official statement. "We have a long relationship with the city of Pasadena and we are honored to bring the B-2 back to demonstrate Team Whiteman's commitment to the American people. Our mission is to carry out nuclear operations and global attacks... anytime, anywhere, and this would not be possible without the support of the people we serve. This is our way of saying thank you."

The bomber lost the last Rose Parade because of an air operation it was carrying out in December 2022, when it suffered a malfunction in the middle of the flight and had to make an emergency landing. Filling the B-2 spot in the last parade were two B-1B Lancer bombers from Ellsworth Air Base, North Dakota.

A Northrop Grumman B-2 stealth bomber flies over Colorado Boulevard announcing the start of the 2022 Rose Parade.

Before that, the Rose Parade had a flyover of the B-2 stealth bomber every year since 2005.

The Rose Parade began in 1890, before the annual college football game Rose Bowl. The parade runs 8 and a half km and features several floats and martial bands.

The B-2 will kick off the long-awaited Rose Bowl playoff game between the University of Michigan Wolverines and the University of Alabama Crimson Tide - whose winner will advance to the national championship game on January 8. The game will air at 6 p.m. Brasilia time on New Year's Day on ESPN.

Tags: Military AviationB-2 SpiritUSAF - United States Air Force / U.S. Air Force

Sharing

tweet

Fernando Valduga

Fernando Valduga

Aviation photographer and pilot since 1992, he has participated in several events and air operations, such as Cruzex, AirVenture, Dayton Airshow and FIDAE. He has works published in specialized aviation magazines in Brazil and abroad. He uses Canon equipment during his photographic work in the world of aviation.

Related news

MILITARY

U.S. helicopters sink three Houthi boats in the Red Sea and shoot crew

31/12/2023 - 11:43

HELICOPTERS

MD Helicopter reveals the new platform of the military helicopter TH530/AH530

31/12/2023 - 11:00

MILITARY

Kurdish opposition in Syria is opposed to the sale of new F-16s to the Turks

30/12/2023 - 19:00

HELICOPTERS

U.S. Army will reduce UH-60 Black Hawk fleet by almost 160 units

30/12/2023 - 18:00

MILITARY

IMAGES: Luftwaffe performs "Elephant Walk" with Typhoons days before the end of the year

30/12/2023 - 15:30

MILITARY

First TA-50 Block 2 training jet is delivered to the Republic of Korea Air Force

30/12/2023 - 12:36

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

January 4, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JAN 5, 2024

The Democrats on the House Oversight Committee today released a 156-page report showing that when he was in the presidency, Trump received at least $7.8 million from 20 different governments, including those of China, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, and Malaysia, through businesses he owned. 

The Democrats brought receipts. 

According to the report—and the documents from Trump’s former accounting firm Mazars that are attached to it—the People’s Republic of China and companies substantially controlled by the PRC government paid at least $5,572,548 to Trump-owned properties while Trump was in office; Saudi Arabia paid at least $615,422; Qatar paid at least $465,744; Kuwait paid at least $300,000; India paid at least $282,764; Malaysia paid at least $248,962; Afghanistan paid at least $154,750; the Philippines paid at least $74,810; the United Arab Emirates paid at least $65,225. The list went on and on. 

The committee Democrats explained that these payments were likely only a fraction of the actual money exchanged, since they cover only four of more than 500 entities Trump owned at the time. When the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in January 2023, Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-KY) stopped the investigation before Mazars had produced the documents the committee had asked for when Democrats were in charge of it. Those records included documents relating to Russia, South Korea, South Africa, and Brazil. 

Trump fought hard against the production of these documents, dragging out the court fight until September 2022. The committee worked on them for just four months before voters put Republicans in charge of the House and the investigation stopped. 

These are the first hard numbers that show how foreign governments funneled money to the president while policies involving their countries were in front of him. The report notes, for example, that Trump refused to impose sanctions on Chinese banks that were helping the North Korean government; one of those banks was paying him close to $2 million in rent annually for commercial office space in Trump Tower. 

The first article of the U.S. Constitution reads: “[N]o Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under [the United States], shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument [that is, salary, fee, or profit], Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” 

The report also contrasted powerfully with the attempt of Republicans on the Oversight Committee, led by Comer, to argue that Democratic Joe Biden has corruptly profited from the presidency. 

In the Washington Post on December 26, 2023, Philip Bump noted that just after voters elected a Republican majority, Comer told the Washington Post that as soon as he was in charge of the Oversight Committee, he would use his power to “determine if this president and this White House are compromised because of the millions of dollars that his family has received from our adversaries in China, Russia and Ukraine.”

For the past year, while he and the committee have made a number of highly misleading statements to make it sound as if there are Biden family businesses involving the president (there are not) and the president was involved in them (he was not), their claims were never backed by any evidence. Bump noted in a piece on December 14, 2023, for example, that Comer told Fox News Channel personality Maria Bartiromo that “the Bidens” have “taken in” more than $24 million. In fact, Bump explained, Biden’s son Hunter and his business partners did receive such payments, but most of the money went to the business partners. About $7.5 million of it went to Hunter Biden. There is no evidence that any of it went to Joe Biden. 

All of the committee’s claims have similar reality checks. Jonathan Yerushalmy of The Guardian wrote that after nearly 40,000 pages of bank records and dozens of hours of testimony, “no evidence has emerged that Biden acted corruptly or accepted bribes in his current or previous role.”

Still, the constant hyping of their claims on right-wing media led then–House speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) to authorize an impeachment inquiry in mid-September, and in mid-December, Republicans in the House formalized the inquiry. 

There is more behind the attack on Biden than simply trying to even the score between him and Trump—who remains angry at his impeachments and has demanded Republicans retaliate—or to smear Biden through an “investigation,” which has been a standard technique of the Republicans since the mid-1990s.

Claiming that Biden is as corrupt as Trump undermines faith in our democracy. After all, if everyone is a crook, why does it matter which one is in office? And what makes American democracy any different from the authoritarian systems of Russia or Hungary or Venezuela, where leaders grab what they can for themselves and their followers?

Democracies are different from authoritarian governments because they have laws to prevent the corruption in which it appears Trump engaged. The fact that Republicans refuse to hold their own party members accountable to those laws while smearing their opponents says far more about them than it does about the nature of democracy.

It does, though, highlight that our democracy is in danger.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#corrupt GOP #corruption #letters from an american #heather cox richardson #Emolument

[whatevergreen]

Korean Atomic Bomb Victims Cenotaph, Hiroshima - 샷타임 2023

A memorial to the 10,000s of Koreans injured and killed by the American atom bombing of Hiroshima in 1945.

Estimates vary but there were around 70,000 Korean victims of the attack, at least 35,000 of whom died. Days later 10,000s more suffered a similar fate in Nagasaki.

Over 10,000 of those killed were slaves, forcibly taken from occupied Korea to work in Japanese industry.

These bombings were a war crime which indiscriminately killed Japanese civilians and 10,000s of the victims of Imperial Japan's own war crimes.

Another view, by 'Real Equator', May 2022

An old (1993) but still relevant article by WISE:

"Japan is the only officially recognized country to have been subject to bombings with nuclear weapons. However, the victims of those bombings were not just the Japanese. There were some Allied Forces who were prisoners of war in both cities at the time, along with many Chinese and Koreans from Japanese-occupied countries who were also victims. In fact, nearly 10 percent of the total victims were immigrant Koreans."

... "A citizens group for Korean victims estimates the number of Korean victims at Hiroshima to have been seventy thousand, of whom thirty-five thousand died. At Nagasaki there were thirty thousand victims with fifteen thousand dead. Although everybody faced equal risks at the time the bombs dropped, most Koreans found the aftermath much harder than the Japanese. For example, many of them had no place to evacuate to without any relatives to go to, thus they had to return to the contaminated and devastated cities. Even people who had evacuated were forced back to the cities to help with the cleaning up there. If medical teams found that a patient was Korean, he or she had to stand at the end of the lines of people seeking help.

On 15 August 1945, Korea finally became independent and Korean people in Japan were free. But they lost everything in Japan as well as their homeland. After they returned to Korea, they had to start their lives all over again from nothing. To add to the losses and the agonies of radiation disease, poverty and discrimination, the Korean War broke out soon afterwards. Some of those arriving in Korea had been born in Japan or lived so long a time there and spoke little Korean. Many of them had no opportunity or access to education and training for a good job so that they could only get jobs subjecting them to terrible physical conditions. One side-effect of the Korean War was that the diseases and after-effects caused by the radiation were hardly known in Korean until the 1960's. If a victim had money to go hospital, doctors put the name of disease as something else. One man whose fingers and toes swelled abnormally was thought to have leprosy and he had to leave his village with his family.

The answers to a questionnaire by the citizens group for Korean victims in 1979 shows that 80% of them are suffering from various illnesses, though just 19% of them can afford to go hospital. One third of have no jobs and 80% live in poverty."

This article also mentions that when the monument was originally built in 1970 it wasn't allowed to be situated in the Hiroshima Peace Park, but was erected in a street. Even in 1993 it hadn't yet been moved to it's current location in the park after years of protest.

A related recent news article:

"Yoon is the first South Korean president to meet with the survivors, a presidential spokesperson said.

As many as 100,000 Koreans suffered during the U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, half of them dying that year while about 43,000 returned to the South and 2,000 went to the North, the Korea Atomic Bombs Victim Association says.

Of the 2,261 victims registered with the association, fewer than 2,000 were still alive by late 2021."

#hiroshima #oppenheimer #korea #japan

[mariacallous]

President Yoon Suk Yeol’s conservative People Power Party (PPP) suffered a major setback in South Korea’s parliamentary election held on April 10, 2024. Of the 300 seats in the National Assembly, the PPP secured only 108 seats through direct and proportional elections. Meanwhile, the major progressive opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) and its satellite parties expanded its majority to 175 seats, hampering Yoon’s ability to govern for his remaining three years in office. Although the Yoon government’s domestic agenda may become further imperiled, his active foreign policy agenda will largely stay intact, including his staunch support for the U.S.-South Korea alliance and promotion of South Korea as a global pivotal state.

A referendum on President Yoon

South Korea’s midterm election was largely seen as a referendum on Yoon. Since coming to office in May 2022, Yoon’s domestic approval ratings have remained low, rarely breaking past 40 percent. Although support for the DPK and its party leader, Lee Jae-myung, has tracked equally as low, South Koreans were more likely to associate their country’s current economic woes, including inflation and high prices, with the ruling government.

A series of small, but unfortunate events and gaffes by Yoon during the election campaign may have also helped tip the scales in favor of opposition candidates in contested districts. In the months leading up to South Korea’s election, minor scandals surrounding the president’s wife and his former defense minister, an ongoing strike by the country’s medical doctors, and the president’s seemingly trivial comment about the price of green onions made him look out of touch.

Moreover, the rapid growth in support for a new progressive party founded by former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk just a month before the election attests to Yoon’s domestic unpopularity. Cho established the Rebuilding Korea Party (RKP) explicitly to challenge the Yoon administration, which he described as “dictatorial” and “anti-democratic.”  Despite the former justice minister’s own corruption scandals and indictment, the RKP performed better than any other third party, winning 12 seats in the party-list proportional voting system.

Domestic political challenges

A divided government and ongoing political polarization will make it especially difficult for government and opposition leaders to make compromises and find bold solutions to pressing social and economic problems, such as high inflation, falling birth rates, and the lack of affordable housing.

Yoon will continue to face challenges in implementing his domestic priorities. During recent town hall meetings, the president unveiled several policy initiatives in hopes of attracting voters, including plans for new housing through urban redevelopment and new infrastructure projects. Just prior to the election, Yoon promised major investment in a new industrial complex for the development of semiconductors and artificial intelligence and pledged to relocate the National Assembly out of Seoul to the administrative city of Sejong in the middle of the country. However, his government will face obstacles in the National Assembly in financing such projects with progressives holding a commanding majority.

Greater continuity in foreign policy

The basic contours of Yoon’s foreign and national security policy, including support for the U.S.-South Korean alliance, deterring North Korea, and the U.S.-Japan-Korea trilateral, will persist. Relations with the United States will also remain positive given wide public support, even among progressives, for the U.S.-South Korea alliance.

Likewise, the South Korean public’s unfavorable views of China and broad recognition of Chinese coercive actions in the region have muted major criticism that Yoon has antagonized China. Despite the Yoon government’s close alignment with Washington, Seoul has also maintained space to engage Beijing diplomatically. Last week, the Yoon government announced Seoul would host a China-Japan-South Korea trilateral summit in late May.

Nevertheless, the DPK’s electoral gains will take some of the wind out of Yoon’s foreign policy sails. The DPK may complicate further South Korean rapprochement with Japan and demand that Yoon seek greater concessions from Tokyo to address historical grievances. This in turn may slow the pace of U.S.-Japan-Korea trilateral cooperation and the implementation of the deliverables announced during the Camp David trilateral summit in 2023, particularly those that call for greater military cooperation with Japan.

Opposition party members may also feel more emboldened to speak out against Yoon’s hostile approach to North Korea in contrast to the DPK’s desire for greater inter-Korea engagement. Yoon’s revised unification plan for the two Koreas, which incorporates principles of freedom and democracy, will likely be criticized by DPK members.

A lame duck?

The term “lame duck” has been repeatedly used to describe Yoon’s remaining time in office. However, Yoon’s predicament may not significantly diverge from his first two years in office since the DPK did not win a supermajority—over 200 seats—needed to overcome filibusters and override presidential vetoes. The election results are also unlikely to change the overall tenor of South Korea’s polarized politics, as the ruling and opposition parties continue to highlight scandals and pursue corruption charges against their political opponents. Although political momentum may shift to the DPK, the PPP will likely regroup in preparation for the next presidential election in 2027 as it did following even greater losses by the conservative party in the 2020 parliamentary elections.

For South Korea’s allies and partners, some concern may emerge regarding whether the Yoon government can sustain its activist foreign policy agenda, including support for Ukraine or increased attention to Taiwan and cross-Strait relations. Yoon, however, is unlikely to backtrack on the idea of South Korea becoming a global pivotal state, as foreign policy and national security issues are typically the prerogatives of the president in South Korean politics, and Yoon remains at the helm of Korea’s strong executive branch.

Seoul recently hosted the third Summit for Democracy in March, and in May will co-host the AI Safety Summit and the China-Japan-Korea trilateral summit. NATO is looking toward South Korea and other Asian countries for greater support on Ukraine. Although unlikely, a more inward-looking South Korea resulting from the president’s so-called “lame-duck” status would be a loss for the international community.

Beyond partisan politics, the DPK too has a stake in elevating South Korea’s global role. Although North Korea and Japan issues elicit starkly different responses from South Korean progressives and conservatives, in recent years, attitudes towards the U.S.-South Korea alliance and China have somewhat converged. The United States and its allies should therefore continue to work with Seoul, irrespective of the party in power, to promote regional security and global order.

[vibinwiththefrogs]

Korean War and Related Reading Recs!

I recently reblogged a post and shared some books I know that have North Korea/DPRK as a topic. Here's a more complete list of books I have on Korean War history and related tangents. I haven't read all of these, and most I haven't read in maybe 3 years so I'm a little fuzzy. All are worth checking out though I think.

Korea: Division, Reunification, and U.S. Foreign Policy by Martin Hart-Landsberg - Far from perfect but in my opinion this is one of the best crash-course books that covers a bit of prewar Korea, US involvement, and discusses Korea's position amongst other Cold War conflicts.

Patriots, Traitors, and Empires by Stephen Gowans - This one is similar to the one above but has more emphasis on events and people North Korea, and is a bit more focused on the peninsula than global implications.

The Hidden History of the Korean War by I.F. Stone - Major major major book in Korean war studies, originally published in 1952 while the war was ongoing. So certain events and questions are highlighted and discussed that got more washed away by popular history.

A Korean American Housewife Goes to North Korea by Shin Eun-mi - A collection of travel diaries from her travels to North Korea between 2011-2012. I'm not sure how the English translation is but I read most of it in Korean. As far as I could tell she's a little naive about the history and understanding of the tensions between North and South, but it contains tons of photos and musing about reunification. There's a documentary on the aftermath of this book being published called To Kill Alice

Works by Bruce Cummings - Cummings is probably the most major English language historian of Korea. I have never completed any of his books because he tends to make weird racist comments typical of an old white American, but he has compiled a TON of sources and information in his books and his bibliographies are good to sort through. Especially in the two volume The Origins of the Korean War, though the second volume is pretty impossible to get a hold of outside a major university.

Gwangju Diary by Lee Jae-eui - (Haven't read) A day to day eye witness account of the Gwangju Uprising.

The Massacres at Mt. Halla by Hun Joon Kim - (haven't read) On the Jeju Uprising/Massacre in 1948 and subsequent conflict and politics on and around the island

Haunting the Korean Diaspora by Grace M. Cho - (haven't read) On the emotional and physical violence between the US and Korea with a focus on sexual relationships between South Korean women and US soldiers.

Korea's Grievous War by Su-kyoung Hwang - (Haven't read) Looks like a focus on Korean politics and internal conflicts between 1948 and 1953

Ideologies of Forgetting: Rape in the Vietnam War by Gina Marie Weaver - This one is on Vietnam but there are sections that discuss Korea and South Korean soldiers in Vietnam. I think it's an amazing book on US war ideology and sexism within the US military that can go hand in hand with any book on US wars

Feel free to add on if anyone has any more recs! I know there's a lot more out there

#Korean war #korean war history #korean history #book recs #history book recs

[warsofasoiaf]

Do critics tend to overstate how much power great powers have over their allies and proxies? Many think China could get Iran and North Korea to just do what they want (and the U.S. with Israel) but is that really true? I feel if Biden did a maximum pressure campaign on Israel it would encourage Netanyahu to tell Biden to shove it, and that Iran would keep pestering the US if China asked

It depends on the relationship. A very weak proxy state that is economically and military dependent on its patron can pretty much be ordered about, because the patron has the ability to cause significant economic distress (or just invade and replace the obstinate leader with a more pliable puppet). A proxy that is stronger (or just further away) can assert its own independent actions. Allies are even weaker - an ally has its own independent decision making, and typically goes along with another country only if its in their strategic interest (or they're bribed with things like lucrative trade contracts). This is one of the big contrasts between the US's foreign policy, where allies have independent foreign policies, and Russian and Chinese foreign policy, which makes heavy use of coercive diplomacy and conceives of foreign relations in the context of greater powers and vassal states.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

#foreign policy

[zvaigzdelasas]

As the three countries boost their military ties, one question Yoon is facing is whether South Korea could be implicated in a potential conflict between China and Taiwan. On Monday, Yoon gave a briefing where, without naming a country, he said the three leaders had agreed to "support the maritime security of countries in the Indo-Pacific region to ensure freedom of navigation and trade."  Critics of Yoon are now saying that the agreement worsens national security by raising the risk that Seoul could get pulled into a war over Taiwan, while also jeopardizing ties with China, South Korea's largest trading partner. The left-wing Kyunghyang newspaper wrote an editorial decrying the agreement, saying that it could pull South Korea into matters in which it is otherwise uninvolved. "In the event of a conflict or crisis in America's broad area of influence in the Indo-Pacific region, there is a high possibility of the U.S. demanding a joint response under the trilateral agreement with South Korea and Japan," the editorial said.

To implement this agreement, the role of the Korean military would have to be expanded in the mid- to long-term from its current focus on countering the [DPRK] to responding to various threats in the Indo-Pacific region. To enable not only “consultation” about these threats but also joint action down the road, the three countries also agreed to “hold annual, named, multi-domain trilateral exercises on a regular basis.”

Two changes are expected in the short term. First, Japan would have more input in the event of a war on the Korean Peninsula. Japan’s role in such a scenario would be to provide rear support (including logistics support) for US reinforcements dispatched to defend the Korean Peninsula under Japan’s Act on Measures to Ensure the Peace and Security of Japan in Perilous Situations in Areas Surrounding Japan of 1999 (renamed the Law Concerning Measures to Ensure Peace and Security of Japan in Situations that Will Have an Important Influence on Japan's Peace and Security in 2016). In that eventuality, any military communication between South Korea and the US would have had to go through the US.

But the consultation to which the three countries have now agreed makes it possible for Japan to directly make various demands of Korea. Japan could ask Korea to allow the Japan Self-Defense Forces (JSDF) to enter Korean territory to rescue Japanese citizens. It could also remain in close communication while using its enemy base strike capability (also called “counterstrike capability”) to launch direct attacks on North Korea. Furthermore, the US and Japan could ask Korea to allow rear support units in the JSDF to operate in Korean sovereign territory, rather than only in open waters in the East Sea (known to Japan as the Sea of Japan), to enable smoother missions. [...]

While the US is not treaty-bound to defend Taiwan, US President Joe Biden has said on four separate occasions since his inauguration in January 2021 that he would defend against an invasion by mainland China. That’s because allowing China to overrun Taiwan unmolested would spell the end of American hegemony in the Western Pacific, a hegemony the US has maintained since the end of World War II, more than seven decades ago.

There’s also a growing sense inside Japan that a war against Taiwan should be regarded as a war against Japan and that the JSDF should respond aggressively. The late Shinzo Abe, former prime minister of Japan, said as much in several interviews with the press. And current Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida raised eyebrows when he said in the House of Representatives in April that if the US asked Japan to deploy the JSDF to defend Taiwan, Japan would “make a decision based on the specific and individual [situation] in accordance with the Constitution, international law and domestic law.”

Various war simulations run by leading American think tanks have concluded that the US-Japan alliance would be able to prevent a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, if barely, on the assumption that both the US and Japan were fully committed to the war. Given these considerations, Japan has revised three documents related to national security last December and decided to increase its defense budget to 2% of gross domestic product within five years.

If a war were to break out in Taiwan under these grim circumstances, it goes without saying that the US and Japan would use the consultation framework to request a “measured response” from Korea. Along with announcing the redeployment of US Forces Korea, the US could pressure Korea to join Japan in making a direct “military contribution” to peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region.

While Korea would not be obligated under treaty to comply with any such requests, its refusal would surely cause serious harm to its alliance relationship with the US.

Japanese newspaper the Asahi Shimbun reported Monday that Korean government officials are whispering about this amounting to Korea “crossing the Rubicon” in its relationship with China.

22 Aug 23

[beardedmrbean]

North Korea said a second attempt to put a spy satellite into orbit failed early Thursday, but the reclusive country vowed to launch another in the coming months.

The Malligyeong-1 reconnaissance satellite was mounted on a new type of carrier rocket called the Chollima-1 and launched from a station in North Pyongan province in the early morning hours, according to the state-run Korea Central News Agency (KCNA). The first and second stages "all flew normally, but failed due to an error in the emergency explosion system during the flight of the third stage," KCNA said in a statement.

North Korea's National Aerospace Development Administration is investigating the cause of the accident and plans to attempt a third launch in October, according to KCNA.

North Korea attempted to launch its first spy satellite on May 31, but it crashed into the West Sea after an "abnormal starting" of the second-stage engine, KCNA said at the time.

MORE: North Korea satellite launch fails, with another promised as 'soon as possible'

In 2018, North Korea claimed to have put a satellite into space but international analysts later said that wasn't true.

Thursday's second attempt coincided with joint military drills between South Korea and the United States, which North Korea has long denounced.

The U.S., South Korea and Japan all issued statements "strongly" condemning North Korea's use of ballistic missile technology for its launch, which despite its failure they said is in violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions. The three allies also reaffirmed their commitment to work closely together to achieve "complete denuclearization" of North Korea in line with the U.N. Security Council resolutions.

"This space launch involved technologies that are directly related to the DPRK intercontinental ballistic missile program," Adrienne Watson, spokesperson for the U.S. National Security Council, said in a statement, using the acronym for North Korea's official name. "The President’s national security team is assessing the situation in close coordination with our allies and partners."

"The door has not closed on diplomacy but Pyongyang must immediately cease its provocative actions and instead choose engagement," Watson added. "The United States will take all necessary measures to ensure the security of the American homeland and the defense of our Republic of Korea and Japanese allies."MORE: US, Japan and South Korea's leaders hold historic meeting as threats from China, North Korea loom large

The incident was assessed as not posting "an immediate threat to U.S. personnel, territory, or that of our allies," according to a statement from the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, which noted that it would "continue to monitor the situation."

South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement the military "was prepared in advance through identifying signs of an imminent launch."

The office for Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi confirmed that he held a telephone call with his South Korean and U.S. counterparts on Thursday morning to discuss North Korea's latest ballistic missile launch. The three officials agreed that the launches are happening "in an unprecedented frequency and in new manners" and that they "constitute a grave and imminent threat to the regional security and pose a clear and serious challenge to the international community," according to a statement from the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The Group of Seven, an intergovernmental political forum consisting of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the U.S., also released a statement condemning "in the strongest terms" North Korea's launch.

#nunyas news #fatty mcdictatorpants needs to feed his people instead of this shit

[collapsedsquid]

A Japanese or South Korean attempt to obtain nuclear weapons would be risky in many ways. It could trigger a preemptive strike—by North Korea against South Korea, for example. Even if it did not provoke an aggressive response, however, it could result in unwelcome diplomatic outcomes. It would put a serious strain on relations with the United States, which serves as the “policeman” of nonproliferation.

Thus a more likely scenario involves these countries adopting a nuclear opacity posture similar to that developed by Israel. Indeed, as the American “unipolar moment” fades, nuclear opacity may become an increasingly attractive option for regional powers facing growing geopolitical risks—and such opaque proliferation might be in line with U.S. interests as well. [...] Bilahari Kausikan argues that for Japan or South Korea there is no other way. An Asia in which not only China, North Korea, Russia, or India but also Japan and South Korea possess nuclear weapons, Kausikan argues, will be more stable, even if this stability would be preceded by a period of uncertainty. “Independent nuclear deterrents,” asserts Kausikan, “will keep Japan and South Korea within the U.S. alliance system. With India and Pakistan in the equation, a multipolar nuclear regional balance will freeze the existing configuration of the Indo-Pacific, preventing its domination by any single major power.” He goes on to explain that this would be tantamount to the end of the “China Dream,” insofar as the latter means a hierarchical order in Asia with the PRC at the top. Perhaps, then, the path to multipolar stability in Asia leads through nuclear opacity.

[gallen]

Yesterday's News from North Korea.

Reckless Military Aid to Ukraine is Suicidal Act of Inviting Disaster: Int'l Affairs Analyst of DPRK

Pyongyang, December 9 (KCNA) -- Ro Ju Hyon, an international affairs analyst of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, released the following article titled "Reckless military aid to Ukraine is suicidal act of inviting disaster":

The Washington Post of the U.S. on Dec. 4 carried an article disclosing the fact that the amount of 155 mm artillery shells the U.S. supplied to Ukraine this year by taking over from the Republic of Korea (ROK) surpasses the amount of shells delivered by European countries by far.

According to it, the Biden administration of the U.S., faced with a difficult task of satisfying the Ukrainian demand for shells, calculated that about 330 000 155 mm shells can be delivered in 40-odd days by persuading the ROK and, on this basis, got down to negotiations on a full scale. As a result, the delivery of shells started from the beginning of this year.

This brought to light once again the truth behind the shameless fraud of the ROK which has insisted so far that it had never delivered lethal weapons to Ukraine.

In April last, puppet traitor Yoon Suk Yeol, in a press interview, made reckless remarks that south Korea can provide weapons to Ukraine in case of serious situation such as large-scale attack on civilians, massacre and violation of war laws, only to invite a backlash from Russia.

At that time, Russia gave a strong warning to the ROK that the offer of weapons to Ukraine would be regarded as an open hostility towards Russia, saying that a new enemy trying to help the enemy of Russia appeared.

Nevertheless, the ROK handed over a large quantity of shells to the puppet Kiev authorities, the amount of which exceeds the one provided by European countries. This is the top-class pro-U.S. act to put even the West, steeped in anti-Russia policy, into the shade.

The political and military gangsters of the ROK have resorted to all sorts of sleight of hand, claiming that they do not provide deadly weapons and that they are working hard to maintain friendly relations with Russia in a bid to cover up their criminal acts. But now that the truth has been brought to light again, world people are sternly watching how the ROK would try to mock the international community again.

It is a vivid manifestation of hostility towards Russia to render military support to the puppet Zelenskiy clique who is waging an unjust proxy war against Russia, a country of the fellow countrymen, as a faithful servant of the U.S. And it is also a war criminal act against peace that instigates the prolonged existence of the bloody Ukrainian crisis.

The international community clearly grasps the hidden intention of the puppet forces of the ROK trumpeting about "arms deal" and derides the dirty plot of the ROK to cover up their criminal nature of getting hell-bent on the military support to Ukraine as the running dog to the U.S.

The wrong choice of the puppet forces of the ROK will inevitably bring only catastrophic disaster and the worst consequences.

The just international community aspiring after global peace and security should frustrate all the anti-peace war moves of the U.S. and its minions by concerted effort

#dprk #north korea #propaganda

[usafphantom2]

Russian cargo aircraft would be making secret flights to North Korea, allegedly looking for missiles

Fernando Valduga By Fernando Valduga 03/30/2024 - 21:15 in Military

A huge An-124 cargo plane with an alleged history of North Korean weapons smuggling was tracked back from an apparent mission to seek more short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) provided by the Kim Jong Un regime.

A recent report by Colin Zwirko of NK News shed light on secret flights conducted by two Russian military aircraft to North Korea.

Russian An-124 (RA-82030) returning to Vladivostok from North Korea in the early hours of March 21, 2024 (Photo: Flightradar24 screenshot)

Russian An-124 (RA-82030) departing from Vladivostok before going to North Korea after 2 a.m. (North Korea time) on March 21, 2024. (Photo: Flightradar screenshot24)

The flight tracking data analyzed by Zwirko suggest that a Russian cargo plane An-224 (tail number RA-82030) - one of the largest transport aircraft in the world - was traveling from the DPRK towards Vladivostok, east of the shared border coast of the two countries at 6:47 a.m. (North Korea time) on March 21. It is likely that the plane went to Pyongyang, since another Russian government aircraft, a Tupolev Tu-154 of the "Special Flight Squadron" (tail number RA-85843), flew from Vladivostok to Pyongyang hours earlier, pointing to ongoing secret exchanges between Russia and North Korea.

Russian Tu-154 (RA-85843) flying from Pyongyang to Vladivostok after midnight on March 21, 2024. (Photo: Flightradar screenshot24)

Russian Tu-154 (RA-85843) flying from Pyongyang to Vladivostok on the afternoon of March 22, 2024. (Photo: Flightradar screenshot24)

This plane departed from the Russian city of the Far East just before midnight on March 20, before landing in Pyongyang after 12:24 a.m. (North Korea time) on March 21. He then left Pyongyang for Vladivostok less than two hours later, about the same time the cargo plane left Vladivostok. Then he turned off the transponder and disappeared from tracking, a common practice for Russian aircraft and cargo ships that were sighted in North Korea. Flights with the Tu-154 did not have their transponder turned off to Pyongyang.

According to the NK News report, several other flights were observed on monitoring sites.

Of particular interest is the involvement of the 224ª Flight Unit and the An-124 cargo plane with tail number RA-82030, which were previously implicated by the U.S. Treasury Department in sanctions related to the transfer of ballistic missiles from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Despite these allegations, the precise nature and timing of such transactions remain unknown.

Tupolev Tu-154 (RA-85843).

The US and South Korea accused the Kim Jong Un regime of providing the Kremlin with missiles, artillery grenades and other weapons to replenish the Russian armed forces while it uses equipment and ammunition in its invasion of Ukraine. Both Moscow and Pyongyang denied that such transfers are taking place.

The recent flight activity coincides with the escalation of tensions in the region, following the North Korean ballistic missile test conducted by leader Kim Jong Un. Although the specific cargo carried by the Russian aircraft remains unknown, intelligence reports suggest the potential transport of short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs).

The ability of the An-124 cargo plane to carry large and heavy weapon systems further amplifies the seizures around the purpose of these secret flights.

South Korea's Chosun News TV reported on the cargo plane on Saturday, citing a comment from an anonymous source of "ROK-US intelligence authority", but not including details such as model, final number or moment.

The source would have said that intelligence agencies caught the plane carrying 15-meter-long cargo "supposedly SRBMs". Allegedly, these were Hwasong-11 series missiles (KN-23).

The apparent stop of the aircraft in Pyongyang occurred a few days after the North Korean supreme leader, Kim Jong Un, presided over his country's first ballistic missile test in two months.

Tags: Antonov An-124 RuslanMilitary AviationNorth KoreaRussian Air ForceTu-154

Sharing

tweet

Fernando Valduga

Fernando Valduga

Aviation photographer and pilot since 1992, he has participated in several events and air operations, such as Cruzex, AirVenture, Dayton Airshow and FIDAE. He has works published in specialized aviation magazines in Brazil and abroad. He uses Canon equipment during his photographic work in the world of aviation.

Related news

INTERCEPTIONS

Italian Eurofighters in Poland perform two interceptions of Russian aircraft in less than 24 hours

30/03/2024 - 20:19

Two U.S. Air Force B-1B Lancers during the 24-2 Bomber Task Force at Morón Air Base, Spain. (Photo: Scott Rathbone / Flickr).

MILITARY

Two more B-1B bombers are deployed in Spain

30/03/2024 - 15:30

MILITARY

Ecuadorian Air Force receives a C-130 Hercules donated by the US

30/03/2024 - 14:00

MILITARY

Royal Dutch Air Force releases F-16 fighters from QRA task

30/03/2024 - 11:14

HELICOPTERS

North Macedonia formalizes order for Leonardo's helicopters

30/03/2024 - 10:38

Greek Air Force F-16 Block 30 fighters.

MILITARY

Greece is selling its oldest F-16 and Mirage 2000, but will any country buy them?

29/03/2024 - 20:00

[warningsine]

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — Joined by his top military officials handling his nuclear-capable weapons and munitions factories, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un arrived in Russia on Tuesday, where he is expected to hold a rare meeting with President Vladimir Putin that has sparked Western concerns about a potential arms deal for Moscow’s war in Ukraine.

North Korea’s official news agency said Kim boarded his personal train from the capital, Pyongyang, on Sunday afternoon, and that he was accompanied by unspecified members of the country’s ruling party, government and military.

Jeon Ha Gyu, spokesperson of South Korea’s Defense Ministry, said in a briefing that the South’s military assesses that Kim’s train crossed into Russia sometime early Tuesday. He didn’t elaborate how the military obtained the information.

North Korean state media showed photographs of Kim walking past honor guards and crowds of civilians holding the national flag and flowers, and also of him waving from his green-and-yellow armored train before it left the station. Kim’s delegation likely includes his foreign minister, Choe Sun Hui, and his top military officials, including Korean People’s Army Marshals Ri Pyong Chol and Pak Jong Chon.

A group of senior officials were at the station to give the leader a “hearty send-off,” according to the Korean Central News Agency, which did not specify whether the train had crossed the border. Citing unidentified Russian regional officials, Japanese broadcaster TBS reported that Kim’s train crossed the border and arrived in the border town of Khasan.

A brief statement on the Kremlin’s website on Monday said the visit is at Putin’s invitation and would take place “in the coming days.” KCNA said the leaders would meet — without specifying when and where.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that Putin and Kim will lead their delegations in talks and could also meet “one-on-one if necessary.” He added that Putin will host an official dinner for Kim.

The talks will focus on bilateral ties, Peskov said. “As with any of our neighbors, we feel obliged to develop good, mutually beneficial relations,” he added.

A possible venue is the eastern Russian city of Vladivostok, where Putin arrived Monday to attend an international forum that runs through Wednesday, according to Russia’s TASS news agency. The city, located about 425 miles (680 kilometers) north of Pyongyang, was also the site of Putin’s first meeting with Kim in 2019.

The visit would be Kim’s first foreign trip since the COVID-19 pandemic, which had forced North Korea to enforce tight border controls for more than three years to shield its poor health care system. While Kim has shown to be more comfortable using planes than his famously flight-adverse father, he has also used his personal train for previous meetings with Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and former U.S. President Donald Trump, reviving a symbol of his family’s dynastic rule.

Associated Press journalists near the North Korea-Russia frontier saw a green train with yellow trim — similar to one used by the reclusive Kim during previous foreign trips — at a station on the North Korean side of a border river.

The train was seen moving back and forth between the station and the approach to the bridge that connects the countries, but ithad not crossed the bridge as of 7 p.m. local time (1000 GMT).

Citing unidentified South Korean government sources, the Chosun Ilbo newspaper reported that a Kim-Putin meeting is possible as early as Tuesday.

The Yonhap news agency and some other media published similar reports. South Korea’s Presidential Office, Defense Ministry and National Intelligence Service didn’t immediately confirm those details.

U.S. officials released intelligence last week that North Korea and Russia were arranging a meeting between their leaders as they expand their cooperation in the face of deepening confrontations with the United States.

According to U.S. officials, Putin could focus on securing more supplies of North Korean artillery and other ammunition to refill declining reserves as he seeks to defuse a Ukrainian counteroffensive and show that he’s capable of grinding out a long war of attrition. That could potentially put more pressure on the U.S. and its partners to pursue negotiations as concerns over a protracted conflict grow despite their huge shipments of advanced weaponry to Ukraine in the past 17 months.

“Arms discussions between Russia and the DPRK are expected to continue during Kim Jong Un’s trip to Russia,” said White House National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson, using the abbreviation for North Korea’s official name of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. “We urge the DPRK to abide by the public commitments that Pyongyang has made to not provide or sell arms to Russia.”

State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said Washington will monitor the meeting closely, reminding both countries that “any transfer of arms from North Korea to Russia would be a violation of multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions,” and that the U.S. “will not hesitate to impose new sanctions.”

North Korea has possibly tens of millions of artillery shells and rockets based on Soviet designs that could potentially give a huge boost to the Russian army, analysts say.

In exchange, Kim could seek badly needed energy and food aid and advanced weapons technologies, including those related to intercontinental ballistic missiles, nuclear-capable ballistic missile submarines and military reconnaissance satellites, analysts say.

There are concerns that potential Russian technology transfers would increase the threat posed by Kim’s growing arsenal of nuclear weapons and missiles that are designed to target the U.S., South Korea, and Japan. Based on North Korean state media photos, Kim’s delegation possibly includes Pak Thae Song, chairman of North Korea’s space science and technology committee, and Navy Admiral Kim Myong Sik, who are linked with North Korean efforts to acquire spy satellites and nuclear-capable submarines.

Kim Jong Un also seems to be bringing Jo Chun Ryong, a ruling party official in charge of munitions policies who had accompanied the leader on his recent tours to factories producing artilleries and missiles.

After decades of a complicated, hot-and-cold relationship, Russia and North Korea have been drawing closer since Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The bond has been driven by Putin’s need for war help and Kim’s efforts to boost the visibility of his partnerships with traditional allies Moscow and Beijing as he tries to break out of diplomatic isolation and have North Korea be part of a united front against Washington.

While using the distraction caused by the Ukraine conflict to ramp up its weapons development, North Korea has repeatedly blamed Washington for the crisis in Ukraine, claiming the West’s “hegemonic policy” justified a Russian offensive in Ukraine to protect itself.

North Korea is the only nation besides Russia and Syria to recognize the independence of two Russian-backed separatist regions in eastern Ukraine — Donetsk and Luhansk -– and it has also hinted at an interest in sending construction workers to those areas to help with rebuilding efforts.

Russia -– along with China -– have blocked U.S.-led efforts at the U.N. Security Council to strengthen sanctions on North Korea over its intensifying missile tests while accusing Washington of worsening tensions with Pyongyang by expanding military exercises with South Korea and Japan.

The United States has been accusing North Korea since last year of providing Russia with arms, including artillery shells sold to the Russian mercenary group Wagner. Both Russian and North Korean officials denied such claims. But speculation about the countries’ military cooperation grew after Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu made a rare visit to North Korea in July, when Kim invited him to an arms exhibition and a massive military parade in the capital where he showcased ICBMs designed to target the U.S. mainland.

Following that visit, Kim toured North Korea’s weapons factories, including a facility producing artillery systems where he urged workers to speed up the development and large-scale production of new kinds of ammunition. Experts say Kim’s visits to the factories likely had a dual goal of encouraging the modernization of North Korean weaponry and examining artillery and other supplies that could possibly be exported to Russia.

Some analysts say a potential meeting between Kim and Putin would be more about symbolic gains than substantial military cooperation.

Russia, which has always closely guarded its most important weapons technologies, even from key allies such as China, could be unwilling to make major technology transfers with North Korea for what is likely to be limited war supplies transported over a small rail link between the countries, they say.

#kim jong un #russia #politics #vladimir putin #north korea

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

August 17, 2023 (Thursday)

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

Philip Stephens of Financial Times today pointed out how much global politics has changed since 2016. That was the year of Brexit and Trump, when those calling for national sovereignty and iron-bound borders seemed to have the upper hand, and it seemed we were entering a new era in which nations would hunker down and international cooperation was a thing of the past.

But now, just seven years later, international cooperation is evident everywhere. Stephens pointed out that a series of crises have shown that nations cannot work alone. Migrants fleeing the war in Syria in 2015 made it clear that countries must cooperate to manage national borders. Then Covid showed that we must manage health across political boundaries, and then Russia’s invasion of Ukraine proved that European nations—and other countries on other continents—must stand together militarily in their common defense. 

That embrace of cooperation is in no small part thanks to President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who have focused on bringing together international coalitions.

The new global stance is on display in the U.S. right now as President Biden hosts the first-ever trilateral summit with Prime Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan and President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea. This is not an easy meeting—Japan and South Korea have a long history of conflict—but they are working to mend fences* to stand firm against North Korea, including its missile tests, and to present a united front in the face of Chinese power. 

Secretary Blinken noted for reporters on Tuesday that the world is currently being tested by geopolitical competition, climate change, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, and nuclear aggressions. “Our heightened engagement is part of our broader efforts to revitalize, to strengthen, to knit together our alliances and partnerships—and in this case, to help realize a shared vision of an Indo-Pacific that is free and open, prosperous, secure, resilient, and connected,” he said. “And what we mean by that is a region where countries are free to chart their own path and to find their own partners, where problems are dealt with openly, where rules are reached transparently and applied fairly, and where goods, ideas, and people can flow lawfully and freely.”

Cooperation between Japan and South Korea “helps us promote peace and stability and furthers our commitment to the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. It advances our shared values and helps uphold principles of the UN Charter like sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity. It allows us to even more expand opportunity and prosperity.”

Blinken addressed Ukraine’s resistance to the Russian invasion, backed by an international coalition, and reiterated that Ukrainians are upholding “the basic principles—sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence—that are vital to maintaining international peace and security.”

In squeezing Russia, international cooperation has again been vital. The Swiss corporation Société Internationale de Télécommunications Aéronautiqes (SITA), which is responsible for booking, flight messaging, baggage tracking, and other airline applications, announced in May that it will leave Russia this autumn. Russian carriers are scrambling. 

Blinken also confirmed that the Biden administration last week achieved a deal with Iran over U.S. prisoners. Iran moved four dual citizens from the infamous Evin Prison to house arrest, and the U.S. is working to get them, along with one more who was already under house arrest, home. In exchange, the U.S. will release several Iranian prisoners along with $6 billion of Iranian oil revenue currently held in South Korea.

Several Republicans have opposed that deal. The senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, James E. Risch of Idaho, said that the “unfreezing” of funds “incentivizes hostage taking & provides a windfall for regime aggression,” and Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) called the money “ransom” and said it was a “craven act of appeasement.” 

But in an op-ed on the national security website Defense One, Ryan Costello, the policy director for the National Iranian American Council, called the deal a win-win. The Iranian money will be released to Qatar, which will release it for purchases of food and medicine, which are not sanctioned. Medicine is desperately needed in Iran, and as Biden said in 2020: “Whatever our profound differences with the Iranian government, we should support the Iranian people.”

In his remarks to reporters on Tuesday, Blinken defended the administration's withdrawal from Afghanistan almost exactly two years ago, saying the decision to withdraw was “incredibly difficult” but correct. “We ended America’s longest war,” he said. “For the first time in 20 years, we don’t have another generation of young Americans going to fight and die in Afghanistan. And in turn, that has enabled us to even more effectively meet the many challenges of our time, from great power competition to the many transnational issues that we’re dealing with that are affecting the lives of our people and people around the world.”

He noted that the U.S. continues to be the leading donor of humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan, contributing about $1.9 billion since 2021, and that the U.S. continues to work to hold the Taliban accountable for the rights of women and girls. 

In Niger, a key U.S. ally in Africa against terrorism, military forces took power from the democratically elected president on July 26, and now the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), a regional union of fifteen countries, has said it will intervene militarily if diplomatic efforts to restore President Mohamed Bazoum to power fail. Army chiefs met today in Ghana to discuss creating a standby force. Nigeria’s chief of defense staff, General Christopher Gwabin Musa, told the meeting: “The focus of our gathering is not simply to react to events, but to proactively chart a course that results in peace and promote[s] stability." 

Blinken said Tuesday that the U.S. strongly supports the efforts of ECOWAS to restore Niger’s constitutional order, but the African Union apparently opposes intervention out of concern that such intervention might trigger a civil war.

Meanwhile, in Sudan, where the Biden administration hoped working with two rival generals would pressure them to restore civilian democracy, the country has been torn apart as those two generals now vie for power. Days ago, the U.S. government warned of corruption and human rights violations in South Sudan, with one of the rival military forces, the Rapid Support Forces, apparently engaging in widespread targeted killing and sexual violence in the western Sudan region of Darfur.

Yesterday, the State Department called for the two factions to stop fighting. “Every day this senseless conflict continues, more innocent civilians are killed, wounded, and left without homes, food, or livelihoods. The parties must end the bloodshed. There is no acceptable military solution to this conflict,” it said. 

—

*The expression “mending fences” appears to come from U.S. Senator John Sherman (R-OH), who in 1879 told reporters he had to go home to take care of his farm (including mending his fences) when everyone had a pretty shrewd idea he was trying to repair political relationships to shore up support, hoping for a presidential nomination. (It didn’t work: his chief manager was Representative James A. Garfield (R-OH), who ended up getting the nomination himself.)

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#foreign policy #the changing world #Letters from an american #Heather Cox richardson #political #Blinken #Biden #leadership #mending fences #diplomacy #soft power