Behind North Korea’s Missile Launch
Late last night North Korea successfully launched an Unha-3 rocket, putting a Kwangmyongsong-3 (Shining Star-3) satellite into orbit. This launch comes following a failed attempt in April. The launch is in violation of two UN resolutions prohibiting North Korea from testing ballistic missile technology and has been widely condemned by the international community and the White House. It is a reminder that North Korea’s weapons program is real and advancing – and that we are ill-served by inflating the threat. Experts point out that the launch was likely undertaken by North Korea for domestic and regional political reasons – the first anniversary of Kim Jong-il’s death, elections in neighboring South Korea and Japan. Regarding the Unha-3 rocket itself, which is derived from the Taopodong-2 ballistic missile, no less an expert than the former head of missile defense at Lockheed Martin disparaged the system as “a baby satellite launcher” that poses no threat to the U.S. What the launch should spur is deepened political and security cooperation in Asia and a renewed focus on strategic rebalance to secure American interests and ensure Pyongyang sees consequences for its actions.
North Korea’s launch is likely motivated by domestic and regional politics and should not be overly interpreted as a threatening gesture. Victor Cha and Ellen Kim of CSIS explain that of the possible factors for the launch, the majority are domestic: “First, the timing of the launch coincides with the one-year anniversary of Kim Jong-il’s death. Second, Pyongyang may seek to test the resolve of new political leaders in China and South Korea. Third, the new leadership in Pyongyang may feel the need to demonstrate a successful test after the well-publicized failure of the April launch. The young leader does not have the credentials of either his father or grandfather and therefore may be held up to a performance metric in both the party and the military. The latter in particular has seen a number of high-level purges under Kim Jong-un. A fourth theory may be the simplest one: North Korea is determined to develop ICBMs, and they need to test their technology to see if it works, regardless of the political timing.”
Scott Snyder of CFR further explains the regional dynamics: “North Korea’s satellite comes days before Japanese and South Korean voters go to the polls, raising the likelihood that national security will be on the minds of voters in both countries. LDP leader and likely next Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe led the country’s strong response to North Korea’s 2006 rocket launch. His efforts resulted in the first UN resolution to criticize North Korean missile tests [in] UN Security Council resolution 1695. South Korea has faced a long tradition of North Korean provocative actions designed to influence South Korean election outcomes, but it is unclear how a satellite launch could tilt South Korea’s electoral result in the North’s favor. The North has publicly opposed conservative candidate Park Geun-hye, but it is hard to say how a satellite launch helps opposition candidate Moon Jae-in or others who advocate a fast-track for reconciliation with the North.” [Victor Cha and Ellen Kim, 12/5/12. Scott Snyder, 12/12/12]
The launch is reason for concern, however poses no immediate or direct security threat to the United States. North Korea’s ongoing nuclear and ballistic missile program warrants concern and needs to be addressed. However, the launch does not reveal an immediate or direct concern for U.S. security. In September, Dave Montague, co-chair of a National Academy of Sciences Missile Defense task force and former president of Lockheed Martin’s Missile Defense Systems division, disparaged the missile that was launched yesterday: “It can’t carry enough payload to be of any significant threat. You know, it’s a — it’s a baby satellite launcher, and not a very good one at that.”
The Washington Post reports that North Korea “still has hurdles to climb before it can clearly threaten the United States. Most analysts don’t think the North is capable of miniaturizing a nuclear warhead to mount on a long-range missile. In addition, ‘what [the latest test] doesn’t show is that they have any idea what the reliability is,’ said David Wright, a missile and global security expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists. ‘And that’s an issue if you’re talking about war capability. If you have a nuclear warhead, you don’t want to put a warhead on a missile that you have no idea how far it will go.’” [NAS Teleconference, 12/11/12. Washington Post, 12/11/12]
U.S. can seize moment to respond by strengthening cooperation with allies and deepening strategic rebalance to the Asia Pacific. Rory Medcalf of the Lowry Institute in Sydney writes, “The launch is a timely reminder that the U.S. rebalancing or pivot strategy to Asia need not be solely about China. This will damage the efforts by China and pivot-sceptics in third countries to portray the strategy as some kind of destabilising containment move.” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has made clear that “one of the purposes of rebalancing to the Pacific region” is by “working with other countries in the region, do whatever we can to ensure that its made clear that that kind of [provocative North Korean] behavior that we’ve seen in the past is not the kind of behavior that we will tolerate in the present or in the future.”
Scott Snyder adds: “For two decades, North Korea’s nuclear push has been the single most effective catalyst for regional cooperation in Northeast Asia, yet North Korea is also the expert at exploiting differences among its neighbors. A North Korean satellite test may provide a basis for strengthened Japan-South Korea cooperation despite deepening differences over history and territorial issues. Further North Korean provocations may yet diminish strategic mistrust between the United States and China. If there is a common threat that should rightly overcome such mistrust and galvanize regional cooperation among the United States, Japan, South Korea, and China, it most certainly should be the prospect of a thirty-year old leader of a terrorized population with his finger on a nuclear trigger.” [Leon Panetta via Foreign Policy, 10/24/12. Rory Medcalf, 12/12/12. Scott Snyder, 12/12/12]
What We’re Reading
U.S. and Philippine officials are expected to agree on an increase in the number of U.S. military ships, aircraft and troops rotating through the Philippines, as tensions simmer with China over its maritime claims.
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who flew to Afghanistan for talks with President Hamid Karzai, says President Barack Obama will decide in the next few weeks how many U.S. troops will remain after the combat mission ends there.
More than 100 countries, including the U.S., recognized a new Syrian opposition coalition, opening the way for greater humanitarian assistance to the forces battling Assad and possibly even military aid.
Syrian forces have dropped incendiary bombs on populated areas.
UN nuclear inspectors would be ready to go to Iran’s disputed Parchin military complex if the Islamic state were to allow it during talks in Tehran later this week.
Efforts to resolve Egypt’s rapidly worsening political crisis suffered a blow when the army abruptly postponed “unity” talks that the opposition had minutes earlier said they would attend.
Greece managed to buy back some of its debt, but did not succeed in reducing its total debt by as much as its backers had hoped.
An official review confirmed that agents of the British state were involved in the 1989 killing of Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane and that it should have been prevented.
An Argentine court acquitted 13 defendants in the high-profile case of a woman missing for 10 years and allegedly forced into sex slavery.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s cancer surgery – his fourth in 18 months – is successfully completed in Cuba.
Commentary of the Day
Robert Gard and John Johns argue that the U.S. Pentagon cuts should be based on cutting the F-35 program.
Thomas Friedman examines what it will take to achieve peace in Egypt.
