AFCEA Global Intelligence Update: 1/17 – 1/18/09
About this post: Below is my edited summary of John McCreary’s immensely informative and valuable, unclassified NightWatch Global Intelligence Update. NightWatch is published by AFCEA, the Armed Forces Communications & Electronics Assn., of which I am a member. Past editions of NightWatch are archived here in their entirety on AFCEA’s site.
Summary: Continued verbal bellicosity by North Korea and the latest on the Israel-Gaza conflict lead the weekend report for Saturday-Sunday.
Highlights, by Country
North Korea (DPRK):
An unsigned statement by a uniformed spokesman for the General Staff today raised political tension between North and South Korea. This is the second bellicose statement by the DPRK in two days. On Friday, the North insisted that it will boost its nuclear deterrent and maintain its nuclear weapons as long as it remains under a nuclear threat.
NightWatch has studied today’s statement in detail. It carries a credible threat of incidents at sea off the west coast, but omits many of the usual terms of threat.
- Timing of the statement: In the last week, the North offered to send a top diplomat to the US inauguration. Two days that was rejected, it issued the strong statement about retaining nuclear weapons directed at the US. The next day, today, it escalated with a threatening statement against the Republic of Korea (ROK). The sequence betrays pique over the diplomatic snub. The quick publication of bellicose statements against the US and its proxy signify the North had these in preparation in the event of rejection. That implies it had a separate set of statements ready had the US accepted what the North considered a generous gesture of conciliation.
- NightWatch readers were advised to expect the North to react strongly to the snub. The statements have attached important positions of the US and the ROK. Diplomacy has been reset to the starting point.
- The other aspect of timing is the North has tried to set itself at the top of the new US administration’s agenda for weeks. Readers will recall the last minute blitz to make some kind of breakthrough in the Six Party venue a few weeks back. The offer to send a top diplomat was part of that initiative, but the Israeli caper in Gaza knocked the North off the front page.
- They tried gestures of conciliation, now they are trying hard line tactics. These are not policy differences just different tactics for getting the attention of the US administration. It is important to the North Korean leaders’ self image that they show they can force the US to pay attention to them. And they can.
- Authority of the statement: The North has a stair case hierarchy of statements from signed commentaries to statement by the top party or government organizations. Unsigned statements on behalf of high level organizations are in the upper middle. They are not the highest level. A statement by a clearly identified Vice Marshal of the Korean Peoples Army – such as Minister Vice Marshal Kim Il-chol – on behalf of the Ministry of the Peoples Armed Forces is the highest statement from the military by the military hierarchy.
- The last statement issued by a Vice Marshal on behalf of the Ministry was issued in 1988 before the Seoul Olympics and threatened to start a second Korean War. But even that is not the most authoritative military statement. A statement by a Vice chairman of the National Defense Commission, such as by Vice Minister Cho Myong-rok or Vice Marshal Kim Yong-chun, would vastly more authoritative.
- Comments on themes: Over half the statement is a recitation of the wrongs the North claims it has suffered from the hardline government of ROK President Li and from the US. The litany of wrongs is a recap of various military announcements by Allied forces during the past year. In typical reversal style, the litany of wrongs by the South forces the North to make a change of some kinds. This is vintage communist cant. They always present themselves as patient and as never having a choice, but to respond at the end of their patience. Their self image requires they appear to be the reasonable party acting prudently.
- After the recitation of wrongs, the statement conforms to the normal structure of such statements by narrowing the issue. The issue is the 60 year old dispute over the seaward extension of the Military Demarcation Line (MDL) down the middle of the Demilitarized Zone on the peninsula. The North has argued for years over a more southward extension of the MDL and does so in today’s statement. The UN forces have used a UN drawn line called the Northern Limit Line (NLL) as the sea boundary of the west coast.
- The essential difference is that some South Korean occupied islands would lie within North Korean claimed territorial waters under the North’s proposal. Using the NLL as the boundary, they are within South Korean waters. The NLL, however, restricts the North’s use of Haeju port and adjacent coastal regions. The dispute flares every summer during blue crab fishing season.
- The statement complains about routine South Korean intrusions into North Korean seas. The South denied any such intrusions today, but routine operations below the NLL would put South Korean ships inside some areas claimed by North Korea, using the MDL. In other words, there is no specific action apparent in public domain reporting to justify the North’s statement, other than pique over being snubbed.
- Significant omissions: The statement carries no threat against the ROK held off shore islands. It carries no time when all of this will take place. Even the adoption of the all out confrontation posture coincides with the winter training cycle. The North has often adopted “postures” to raise tension, even though that is entirely its business. The really threatening statements require action by the South without which the North has no choice but to retaliate, and the verbs are all present tense. These are mainly future tense without a time term, measured in weeks or days, for example, or pegged to some future event. Except for a change in posture, the North has embraced no commitment to do anything in any time frame.
- The statement also lacks the usual blood and guts tone of the really belligerent statements that increase tension across the Peninsular. This focuses primarily on the disputed area off the west coast.
- The threat: If South Korean ships and craft enter the sea area north of the extended Military Demarcation Line, they should expect to receive North Korean gunfire without warning. There is no language indicating the North intends to start a war. This is not a new threat, but it is more pointed and explicit. Taken together, the three actions suggest the North will try to contrive an incident to prove their point and to get the US’ attention during inauguration week apparently.
- Thus, a general increase in readiness signals intent for specific action. For example, during the 1976 tree cutting incident in the Joint Security Area at Panmunjom, UN Command forces were raised to full combat readiness, before the UN Command team entered the security area and cut the offending tree to the ground. The adoption of the increased readiness posture was the unambiguous indicator that the UN Command intended to take action in the context of that crisis, i.e., the tree cutting.
- The same practices are true of North Korea. They are contriving a crisis and showing by their behavior that they have decided to do some limited violence if the opportunity arises in the area of dispute they have selected. Their intention is not general war, but, as is typical for them, they are prepared for escalation.
- The diplomatic snub last week appears to underlie this quick change in tone and the succession of statements. Today’s announcement puts the North under self-imposed pressure to prove it means what it says. Any time Tuesday would be a good time for it to make its point.
South Korea:
The military called a border alert today after North Korea issued its statement, according to Yonhap and Agence France-Presse. The ROK Joint Chiefs of Staff ordered intensified guards from the army, navy and air force and increased reconnaissance flights by spy planes, a Joint Chiefs spokesman said. South Korean President Lee Myung Bak was briefed on Pyongyang’s statement at an emergency meeting.
Israel:
Today Israeli Prime Minister Olmert called [for] a unilateral cease-fire to begin on 18 January, international media reported. The goals of Israel’s Operation Cast Lead “were met in their entirety, and even beyond,” Olmert said, adding that Hamas’ capabilities had been seriously damaged. His announcement came after Israel’s National Security Cabinet voted in favor of the cease-fire.
Mr. McCreary summarizes the Israeli exit strategy, as he sees it: Declare victory and depart. He opines: Readers should have confidence that the tunnels in the southern access corridor to the Gaza Strip will have continued attention in the coming weeks.
PDF 
