Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

Deliberate or Accidental, a New Korean War Would be Devastating

4 years ago
  0 Comments Say Something  »
Text Size
The soaring modern glass towers of downtown Seoul are magnificent -- and to a North Korean artillery officer squinting through his sights from just 32 miles away, a delicious set of targets. The glistening South Korean capital is a city of glass, almost literally in the shadow of some 500 long-range heavy artillery guns from which North Korea can fire half a million artillery shells an hour, for several hours.

A war on the Korean peninsula could explode almost without warning, senior U.S. military officers say. North Korea's immediate, if suicidal, intent in such a conflict: to demolish Seoul in a blizzard of glass shards and cause tens of thousands of casualties, before U.S. and South Korea forces could react.

That is why millions of people living in Seoul regularly practice scrambling into bomb shelters in subway stations -- and why any disruption in "normal'' relations with the reclusive and unpredictable regime to the north quickly gets the world's attention: a surprise attack from the North, whether deliberate or a miscalculation, would be bloody and costly, and likely would trigger all-out war.

Within hours of North Korea's apparently unprovoked artillery attack on South Korean territory and the South's retaliatory artillery barrage, U.S. officials, diplomats and policy analysts were assuring each other that this was only a "provocation'' by the North. The Obama administration took a rhetorical firm but low-key line on Tuesday, with Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell saying that the North Korean attack was "not, frankly, out of pattern for the North lately."

"North Korea has a pattern of doing things that are provocative,'' deputy White House spokesman Bill Burton explained to reporters Tuesday as Air Force One took President Obama to Kokomo, Ind., for an economic pep talk.

Nonetheless, Obama, saying the United States stands "shoulder to shoulder'' with South Korea, has dispatched the aircraft carrier George Washington, together with a guided missile cruiser and three guided missile destroyers, to begin "defensive'' naval exercises in the Yellow Sea off South Korea's west coast. The U.S. strike group will conduct air defense and surface warfare readiness training with South Korean naval units.

A spokesman for the U.S. 7th Fleet said the three-day joint exercises, which were previously planned, will begin Sunday. The warships include the cruiser USS Cowpens and the destroyers USS Lassen, USS Stethem and USS Fitzgerald.

But why Pyongyang ignited the crisis remained a mystery.

One favored theory in Washington is that Kim Jong-Un, the pudgy, Swiss-schooled son and heir of North Korean strongman Kim Jong-Il, needs to establish credibility with the military and focus them on the enemy to the south while he replaces some senior generals with his own cronies. A related theory holds that the elder Kim, having twice failed to win a massive injection of Chinese foreign aid, is now seeking to intimidate Seoul and Washington into giving more aid by threatening war and boasting of progress on his nuclear weapons program.

But nobody knows. The DMZ that has divided North and South since 1953 also has blocked the two sides from developing any hot line or joint measures to handle crises, the kinds of arrangements that once flourished between the West and the Soviet Union along the heavily fortified borders of the Cold War.

Even so, the United States is required under a 1953 Mutual Defense Treaty to help the Republic of Korea defend itself. On Tuesday, Morrell, speaking on MSNBC, said the United States would "honor our alliance obligations to the South.'' South Korea put its military on its highest peacetime alert, but at the Pentagon, Marine Col. Dave Lapan, a spokesman, said it was "premature'' to say what action, if any, the United States was considering in reaction to the shelling exchange.

A lightning strike from the North, quickly followed by a massive and powerful push through South Korea by North Korean infantry and tanks, is how the last war began in 1950. South Korea and the U.S. were woefully unprepared; among the first American units to arrive to defend South Korea was Task Force Smith, mostly untrained and poorly equipped American GIs who fought valiantly but were virtually wiped out in the North Korean onslaught.

The 28,500 U.S. troops now stationed in South Korea, along with a large and powerful South Korean military, are better prepared, according to U.S. Army Gen. Walter "Skip'' Sharp, who commands U.S. and allied forces there.

A West Point armor officer who was born while his father was fighting in Korea, Sharp is charged with executing Op Plan 5027, the war-fighting blueprint that focuses immediately on destroying North Korean artillery. Those targets are already stored in U.S. and Republic of Korea (ROK) computers for instant destruction by artillery, missiles or air strikes. Radar which back-traces the trajectory of enemy artillery shells would precisely locate mobile artillery.

"The real threat in South Korea is long-range artillery that's located right on the DMZ that can range Seoul, a city of tens of millions, so we really focus on being able to quickly take that artillery out, if it ever started,'' Sharp told reporters last year. "That I'm very confident in because we work very hard on that.''

The North Korean military is huge but old and rusty, U.S. officers say, largely consisting of castoff Russian and Chinese weapons and hampered by a shortage of fuel, training and spare parts. Aside from its artillery, North Korea has invested what it can in its missiles and special operations forces -- the missiles to augment artillery strikes in the opening hours of a conflict, and its commandos to punch across the DMZ to sow chaos behind the U.S.-ROK lines with sabotage and IEDs, the roadside bombs used with effect in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Op Plan 5027, rehearsed at least annually by U.S. and ROK ground, sea and air units, calls for a vigorous counterattack against North Korean artillery, air bases and the 700,000 troops and 2,000 tanks stationed near the DMZ. The plan, refined constantly since the 1970s, also identifies the units and sequenced movement of U.S. reinforcements as they are needed.

U.S. air power, including B-1 bombers, would play a critical role in attacking the North's artillery and missile sites in the opening hours of a conflict. Should North Korean armor succeed in breaking through the DMZ, the tanks would have to squeeze through narrow mountain valleys where they'd be vulnerable to air strikes. In addition, South Korean highway overpasses are designed to be blown up and dropped, the rubble blocking the roadway, in case of invasion.

Among other military preparations for war are plans to evacuate U.S. citizens and military dependents, a complex operation that U.S. forces practice twice a year.

"I think the North Koreans probably realize they could not win in a normal conventional all-out attack,'' Sharp said last year. But recognizing that the North has deliberately provoked crises in the past, Sharp said he has worked with the U.S. embassy to develop a series of potential responses to incidents such as Monday's artillery shelling.

"In every case, though, there is a recognition and a plan that in the midst of whatever is going on up North, we have to be prepared to defend South Korea in case we guess wrong,'' he said.

Bottom line, he said, if there is war the U.S. intention is to "fight and win.''
Filed Under: Military, Analysis

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.


Filter by:

I am thinking instead of sadam being removed from power. It is far more important that north korea should have been looked at closer. Not saying sadam didn't deserve it.Pyongyang is a threat to us and his neighbors. If US would just tell china since they have given there opinion what they want us to do about north korea is take care of it themself and with a deadline or cut them out of are trade and bring back jobs to the american people. I AM MAIN ST. MUFFLER AND I APROVE THIS MESSAGE...

December 03 2010 at 8:58 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

40 or 50 nukes on N. Korea would clean up the situation and would have the effect of sending Iran a very powerful message to stand down. Face it - its either going to be Iran or North Korea. I say all in to win and avoid thousands of American & S. Korean deaths. No rebuild either. Let China spend their money to rebuild their puppet state.

November 29 2010 at 5:45 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to Ken's comment

you must be a very very uneducated redneck. reading this really makes me wana laugh. first off 40-50nukes is a bit of an overkill as that amount of nuke is enough to turn the entire continent of north america into a wasteland. 2nd if u know anything about weather, the radiation fall out will travel north westward towards china, mongolia and russia, makin more enemies for the USA. 3rd y would we let china spend their money to rebuild korea as we are the ones who spent the money to take it down the first place,having bases in north korea gives us a huge strategic advantage over china as north korea is connected to china by land, which means mechanized infantry like us can just march into mainland china if we feel the need to

December 30 2010 at 9:23 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply

As we leave Iraq the military industrial complex will need somewhere else to spend taxpayers money, so I guess a military buildup in the pacific is as good as any.

November 27 2010 at 9:28 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

The only peace we're going ot have is the 7 year peace, after the biggest war ever. Read the bible and see it. You, me, or anyone doesn't have a choice in this whether you believe it or not. It's as easy as sunrise and sundown. Good luck to all.

November 26 2010 at 12:41 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to GO-WRITER's comment

where in the bible did it say that??? and what version of the bible have u been reading? last time i checked with my mate down at the MI, he told me simulation they did on a full scale pre emptive strike on north korea will incapacitate their artilry piece real quick. besides the lack of training, fuel and equipment means the north koreans wont put up much of a fight. and we are pretty sure the chinese aint gona intervine neither as the PLA personels dont have the experience or the balls, after all china hasnt won a war in the last 100yrs. so i dont see a big war coming at all

December 30 2010 at 9:16 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

A war, once started will develop its own dynamics which are inherently unpredictable. Let's hope there will be no war.

November 25 2010 at 3:58 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to bfree34's comment

as true as that is for us, God is the exception to this rule because he already knows everything that's going to happen...he knows how many times you will blink your eyes and exactly how many ants you will see on the ground throughout the rest of your time on Earth, so we dont know but God does and always has...he knows the future of war... he loves you and i hope you're a Christian so you will go to Heaven...He loves you and i love you and everyone else on this comment are all in my prayers...anyways, God knows what will happen, we dont though

December 06 2010 at 4:08 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

If there was ever a reason to consider using nuclear weapons as a deterrence, isn't this it? The military leaders in the west have become eunuchs. Why is the world sitting around letting this bully nation start a war? We should just "take them out" and be done with it already. 20 years is a long time to watch this happen

November 25 2010 at 2:30 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply

ken is right tarriffs and tell the chinese to take care of this madman , get another chinese communist to run the north with a nitch to capitalism, these northern korean leaders are innept, this is 21 century, new things are in the works

November 25 2010 at 1:50 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

yeah devastating for north korea! hit them hard na first and seoul wont get hit!

November 25 2010 at 12:50 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply

Let's see. Should North Korean shellfire across international boundaries be appeased? Did ceding the Rhineland and Sudetenland avoid further unpleasantness in Europe?

November 24 2010 at 10:00 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply

China. No one can say how much influence they have over the North Koreans, nor how China would respond to our pressure. Because of our deficit, China could put our financial system into chaos. Disruption at this point would hurt us far, far more than it would China. China and Saudi Arabia are holding our IOUs, and this limits our options. Two bright spots: China does not want to see American nuclear weapons used near their border, and in any clash, that is what could happen. They also know the end result of an atomic war would be a democratic Korea sitting on their border, which they want to avoid at all costs.

November 24 2010 at 9:05 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Follow Politics Daily

  • Comics
Featuring political comics by Robert and Donna TrussellMore>>
  • Woman UP Video
politics daily videos
Weekly Videos
Woman Up, Politics Daily's Online Sunday ShowMore»
politics daily videos
TV Appearances
Showcasing appearances by Politics Daily staff and contributors.More>>