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
Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. | Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. speaking wit… | Flickr

Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten

Media


Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.”

keep readingShow less
Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

Peter Thiel attends the annual Allen and Co. Sun Valley Media Conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, U.S., July 6, 2022. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

QiOSK

The trouble with doing business with Israel — or any foreign government — is you can't really say anything when they do terrible things with technology that you may or may not have sold to them, or hope to sell to them, or hope to sell in your own country.

Such was the case with Peter Thiel, co-founder of Palantir Technologies, in this recently surfaced video, talking to the Cambridge Union back in May. See him stumble and stutter and buy time when asked what he thought about the use of Artificial Intelligence by the Israeli military in a targeting program called "Lavender" — which we now know has been responsible for the deaths of an untold number of innocent Palestinians since Oct 7. (See investigation here).

keep readingShow less
Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Committee chairman Jack Reed (D-RI), left, looks on as co-chair Roger Wicker (R-MS) shakes hands with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on President Biden's proposed budget request for the Department of Defense on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., April 9, 2024. REUTERS/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades

Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Military Industrial Complex

Now that both political parties have seemingly settled upon their respective candidates for the 2024 presidential election, we have an opportune moment to ask a rather fundamental question about our nation’s defense spending: how much is enough?

Back in May, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, penned an op-ed in the New York Times insisting the answer was not enough at all. Wicker claimed that the nation wasn’t prepared for war — or peace, for that matter — that our ships and fighter-jet fleets were “dangerously small” and our military infrastructure “outdated.” So weak our defense establishment and so dangerous the world right now, Wicker pressed, the nation ought to “spend an additional $55 billion on the military in the 2025 fiscal year.”

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest

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.