Follow us on social

2020-10-12t000000z_857557961_mt1ltana000acyuv3_rtrmadp_3_asia-north-korea

North Korean military parade offers a sober reminder of the original ‘forever war’

Kim Jong Un showed off some new military gear but it’s important that Washington doesn’t overreact.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific

North Korea’s military parade this weekend celebrating the 75th anniversary of the ruling Workers' Party was streamed for an international audience. It was expected to be the largest military parade in North Korea’s history. The event was pre-recorded Friday evening and streamed Saturday evening (Korea Standard Time) via Korean Central Television (KCTV), a state-owned broadcaster in North Korea.

In his speech, Chairman Kim Jong Un struck a somber and introspective tone. He repeatedly thanked the North Korean people for withstanding the “harsh circumstances” of this year, shedding tears at one point. In a nod to the public health challenges stemming from the COVID pandemic and natural disasters, Kim gave special recognition to the People’s Army, calling its efforts “heroic.”  

His message to the foreign audience was one of measured defiance. He avoided being overly provocative, choosing instead to let the military parade do the talking. Indeed, nuclear experts were looking for clues to a new strategic weapon that Kim Jong Un promised in his new year speech. And they were not disappointed: North Korea unveiled a new 11-axle intercontinental-range ballistic missile (ICBM) at the parade, adding to North Korea’s growing nuclear and chemical arsenal

This is the latest reminder that the longer the world waits, the more dangerous the Korean Peninsula will become. Any escalation in tension on the Korean Peninsula — home to the original “forever war” — would be incredibly deadly. The Congressional Research Service estimates that 300,000 would die in the first days of fighting through conventional weapons alone. 

Any conflict with North Korea would have immediate consequences on American economy as well. The 2018 study by the Economic Intelligence Unit found that a war on the Korean peninsula would destroy 25,000 direct and indirect auto jobs in the United States in its first year. At a time when the U.S. economy is contracting due to the COVID pandemic, the last thing Americans need right now is an accidental conflict between two nuclear-armed states. 

So what should the United States do?

Rather than overreact to Pyongyang’s predictable display of force, Washington should focus on the underlying cause of North Korea’s behavior: its geopolitical insecurity. Such concern will not disappear overnight. But trying to reach peace on the Korean Peninsula, as stated in the joint statement of the Singapore Summit, is impossible without addressing North Korea’s perennial need for bombs as a security guarantee. One way to do this is by declaring the seven-decades long Korean War over and signing a peace treaty to end that chapter of violence between the United States, South Korea, North Korea, and China.

The broader question is in defining the United States’ core strategic interests in the region. Is it indefinite militarism that so clearly benefits the military-industrial complex at the expense of lasting peace and stability in East Asia? So far, the United States appears to be more fixated on maintaining 28,500 U.S. troops in South Korea than answering the basic question of to what end.

The long-term goal of U.S. grand strategy should be to facilitate the creation of a peaceful global order consisting of fully sovereign states capable of providing for their own security, rather than to perpetuate dependency in American military or American weapons. 

In this weekend’s parade, Kim Jong Un said he would develop nuclear weapons in order to “defend the rights to independence and existence.” It is time for Washington to be equally honest about U.S. interests in the region. 


Pyongyang, North Korea.- North Korean leader Kim Jong-un (center) participates in the celebration to mark the 75th anniversary of the founding of the Workers' Party (WPK) in Pyongyang, North Korea on October 11, 2020. At the celebration a large-scale military parade, banquet, fireworks, and gymnastics and art shows were held.
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Trump tariffs
Top image credit: Steve Travelguide via shutterstock.com

Linking tariff 'deals' to US security interests is harder than it looks

Global Crises

In its July 31 Executive Order modifying the reciprocal tariffs originally laid out in early April, the White House repeatedly invokes the close linkages between trade and national security.

The tariff treatment of different countries is linked to broader adhesion to U.S. foreign policy priorities. For example, (relatively) favorable treatment is justified for those countries that have “agreed to, or are on the verge of agreeing to, meaningful trade and security commitments with the United States, thus signaling their sincere intentions to permanently remedy … trade barriers ….and to align with the United States on economic and national security matters.”

keep readingShow less
Kurdistan drone attacks
Top photo credit: A security official stands near site of the Sarsang oilfield operated by HKN Energy, after a drone attack, in Duhok province, Iraq, July 17, 2025. REUTERS/Azad Lashkari

Kurdistan oil is the Bermuda Triangle of international politics

Middle East

In May, Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that a strong Kurdistan Region within a federal Iraq is a "fundamental and strategic component" of U.S. policy. Two months later, that policy was set on fire.

A relentless campaign of drone attacks targeting Iraqi Kurdistan’s military, civilian, and energy infrastructure escalated dramatically in July, as a swarm of Iranian-made drones struck oil fields operated by American and Norwegian companies. Previous strikes had focused on targets like Erbil International Airport and the headquarters of the Peshmerga’s 70th Force in Sulaymaniyah.

The attacks slashed regional oil production from a pre-attack level of nearly 280,000 barrels per day to a mere 80,000.

The arrival of Iraqi National Security Advisor Qasim al-Araji in Erbil personified the central paradox of the crisis. His mission was to lead an investigation into an attack that Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) officials had already publicly blamed on armed groups embedded within the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF)—components of his own government.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Sudanese protester stands in front of a blazing fire during a demonstration against the military coup, on International Women's Day in Khartoum, Sudan March 8, 2022. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Sudan civil war takes dark turn as RSF launches 'parallel government'

Africa

In a dramatic move last week, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) announced the selection of its own prime minister and presidential council to compete with and directly challenge the legitimacy of the Sudanese government.

News of the new parallel government comes days before a new round of peace talks was expected to begin in Washington last week. Although neither of the two civil war belligerents were going to attend, it was to be the latest effort by the United States to broker an end to the war in Sudan — and the first major effort under Trump’s presidency.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.