North Korea rattled the world yet again when it fired the second intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in a month and at unusual time ~ late night of 28 July. Like the previous one of 4 July, it fell in Japan’s exclusive economic zone in the Sea of Japan off the northern island of Hokkaido.
As usual, condemnation from all quarters followed. For President Donald Trump, the challenge of North Korea’s nuclear and missile programme is given.
But the bigger challenge is getting the cooperation of all stakeholders for a common stand to deal with the rogue state. Getting the cooperation of China and Russia is a much bigger challenge than North Korea itself. What are then the responses or possible responses of the stakeholders?
But first, a short mention of the potency of the North Korean threats and how real are they? This second ICBM launch reached the highest altitude ever achieved by North Korea, with the possibility to threaten the US capital of Washington. The launch of the Hwasong-14 missile demonstrated that North Korea has established its ICBM technology. This is the real worry.
Understandably, the sense of crisis within the Trump administration reached unprecedented levels. This Hwasong-14 had more engines than the first, launched on 4 July. By taking a high-angle “lofted trajectory” that sent the missile to almost 900 km higher than the previous ICBM and reached a maximum altitude of 3,724.9 km and by taking 47 minutes 12 seconds than the previous one, the threat perception was perceptibly heightened. An ICBM with a flight time of 45 minutes and one that reaches an altitude of 3,000 km would have a range of 9,000 to 10,000 km if launched at a normal vector.
This means, at 10,000 km, this would put Los Angeles on the US west coast and Denver in the western US within its range. North Korea will have to overcome two hurdles, however. These missiles would be ready for actual battle if atmospheric re-entry technology and warhead miniaturization are perfected.
These two requirements are yet to be verified but once successful, the missile can be considered a complete threat. North Korea intentionally used lofted trajectories in its missile launches so as to not fire them over Japan. It is thought that North Korea has improved its technology based on data sent back from missiles it has launched on temperatures and vibration levels inside the warhead, re-entry angles and other factors.
However, to perfect its re-entry technology to prepare for actual battle, North Korea’s future launch is likely to be aimed at the Pacific Ocean. Pyongyang is also trying to miniaturise its nuclear warheads to fit onto an ICBM. A sixth nuclear test coinciding with the joint drills by USSouth Korea militaries in August is a possibility. So, how does Trump choose to respond to this perceived threat?
In a direct response to the missile test conveying a sharp warning, two US Air Force B-1B Lancer bombers on a 10- hour mission from Anderson Air Force Base, Guam, and escorted by a Japan Air Self-Defense Force F-2 fighter jet flew into Japanese airspace and then over the Korean Peninsula.
The US also conducted separate drills with the South Korean Air Force. The drills were intended to keep a check on North Korea. Japan’s Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, who took charge of the Defence portfolio after Tomomi Inada resigned, underscored that the drill was aimed at “further strengthening the deterrent power and coping abilities of the entire Japan-U.S. alliance and showing Japan’s will and advanced capabilities for stabilizing the regional situation” under the tough security environment.
Throughout the mission, the aircrew had practised intercept and formation training, enabling them to improve their combined capabilities and tactical skills. In order to strengthen pressure on the isolated nation, Japan is also seeking cooperation from the ASEAN nations.
Both the US and Japan feel frustrated with the reluctance of China and Russia to impose additional sanctions against North Korea. Yet, both have not abandoned their efforts to persuade China and Russia to play constructive roles. The US, Japan and South Korea together have agreed to coordinate new sanctions resolutions against North Korea to be adopted at the UN Security Council.
China is the only international ally of North Korea. It has its own strategic compulsions, which weigh high over aligning with others for tougher sanctions. China, therefore, has been resisting tougher sanctions against North Korea. Efforts by the US and Japan to put pressure by way of freezing the assets of Chinese companies that have close ties with North Korea with a view to press Beijing to play a part in efforts to strengthen containment of North Korea have yielded little.
As a result, while Beijing has remained inactive, Pyongyang’s surge in advancing its weapons system and missile technology continues.
South Korea is equally irked with the provocation from its immediate neighbour. After moving into the Blue House, President Moon Jae-in sent peace overtures to Kim Jong-un with a view to engage in dialogue to resolve the nuclear issue. Kim Jong-un remained unrepentant and went ahead with the second ICBM launch.
Moon had reservations on his predecessor government’s decision to allow the US deploy the Terminal High Altitude Air Defence battery system and made a campaign promise to relook at it. Because of Kim Jong-un’s obduracy, Moon now wants to discuss with the US the deployment of additional THAAD battery as threat perception heightened. Besides, South Korea’s Defence Minister Song Youngmoo announced that Seoul would prepare independent measures to curb North Korea’s nuclear theat.
Support from elsewhere is also being solicited. India, which has diplomatic ties with both the Koreas, has come under pressure from the US to scale back engagement with North Korea. Responding to UN resolutions, India banned in April 2017 all trade with the North, barring food and medicines. India prohibited its Indian citizens or companies from supplying to Pyongyang arms, any nuclearrelated material or technology, or any other material that would enhance its ballistic capabilities.
India’s problem is the North Korea-Pakistan nuclear nexus and therefore it can use this opportunity to punish Pyongyang.
Trump is “very disappointed” with China, saying that it has done “nothing”. At other times, he has said all options are on the table, including military strike. This would be disastrous for the region and the world if Trump executes the threat. He has also received support from Britain and Australia; both countries have agreed to persuade North Korea to abandon its weapons programme. The picture looks grim.
The situation is extremely volatile, with little hope for a solution in the horizon.
There are risks of an unintended conflict breaking out and if that happens, the escalation could be quick and the consequences would be unimaginable as several countries shall be drawn into the conflict.
(The writer is currently Indian Council for Cultural Relations India Chair Visiting Professor at Reitaku University, Japan. The views expressed are his own and do not represent the opinion of either the ICCR or the Government of India. He may be reached at rajaram.panda@gmail.com)