DPRK- Cheese in the Trap

When one looks at the content and general tenor of broadcasts from mainstream and official US media, parroted in the right wing media of South Korea, and the media of Japan and certain NATO allies, it is apparent that there is a present threat of physical enforcement of UN sanctions against North Korea especially in regard to alleged violations by at sea transfers. These are generally reported as exports of North Korean coal and imports of oil or petroleum products alleged to be in excess of UN sanctions limits from variously flagged vessels. There are obviously inherent risks of an incidental outbreak of armed conflict in such a situation, perhaps as potentially volatile as the overflights and 12 mile limit incursions by US aircraft and surface warships in the South China Sea.

(Source- Channel A News Top Ten, 3.20 ) WMSL-750 USCGC Bertholf dispatched to Sasebo, Japan.


One wonders who will be the real target of the allegedly stronger sanctions enforcement effort, North Korea or China? The point may be moot. The US has apparently dispatched the US Coast Guard patrol vessel Bertholf from Alameda, California, to Sasebo, Japan, to participate in UN sanctions monitoring activities in the East Sea/Sea of Japan and perhaps in the East China Sea as well, according to Channel A News. In addition to this vessel there are a plethora of US airborne reconnaissance assets operating in the Korean region and the East China Sea. Occasionally one sees B-52 missions into the East China Sea, and South China Sea as well, and other air missions as far north as Russian maritime territories north of Japan. Check out Aircraft spots at twitter which reports regularly on these activities when they are detected.

https://twitter.com/aircraftspots?lang=en

Today Channel A Top Ten News reported that Global Hawk drones would be assisting in the current reconnaissance efforts in support of UN sanctions. Along with the USCGC Bertholf, the large maritime security cutter, the HMS Montrose has been deployed to the region for the same mission, and also the French frigate Vendemiaire. Allegedly, these ships will operate in the East China Sea. The French have also dispatched at least one Falcon 200 reconnaissance aircraft which reportedly will operate in West Sea/Yellow Sea as well. These military resources while no doubt valuable in the context of a general reconnaissance or presence mission, are limited compared to US, Japanese or South Korean military resources in the region. Perhaps the European allies may have other powerful forces in the region that are not being disclosed. The same holds true for the US Navy. The activities of the major naval combatants of the US and Japan haven't been reported on Channel A News Top Ten broadcasts recently. (see- my review of military exercises dated Feb. 17)

(Source- Channel A News Top Ten 3.20) HMS Montrose (F-236). England dispatches escort ship for surveillance of North Korean illegal at sea transfers.

The Bertholf appears to be a potent armed vessel for the interdiction missions for which it was designed. Certainly, there is no mistaking it's identity and function as US vessel. The French and British contribution is symbolic contributing to the notion of a combined allied force. While all of the reconnaissance activities and righteous condemnations of North Korean nuclear weapons development activities lends the imprimatur of "international law" to the potential sanctions interdiction efforts, one can't help but perceive the old imperialist image of "gun boat" diplomacy where the western powers and later Japan ganged up on China to humiliate them in every possible way by either brute force or the threat of brute force. Of course Japan did that to both Korea and China for the better part of fifty years, while the US and UK did it to China for a century. It isn't clear exactly that anyone involved in the chorus of approval for what occurred in Hanoi, is concerned one wit, about how this might appear to the Chinese or North or South Korea, now. One might get the idea that someone is itching for a war. Inexplicably, Channel A News, used some quotes from General Brooks, referable to the crisis situation in 2017, about US readiness to go to war with North Korea. This comment is taken completely out of context and contradicts his current perspective expressed on CBS, February 28th just after the talks failed. See: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-kim-jong-un-summit-winner-no-one-vincent-brooks-says/

(Source- Channel A News Top Ten, 03.20) DPRK Ambassadors from China, Ji Jae Ryong, Russia, Kim Hyun Chung, and the UN, Kim Song, recalled to Pyongyang for consultations. Is Kim's decision imminent? The title of the second report is: bloody nose strategy- "Really preparing for war."


One would prefer to think that there isn't really such an intention for war but the bluff seems fairly convincing. Hubris and complacency rule. Rather it seems, that a regime change is on the US agenda for North Korea whether accompanied by bloody nose attacks or not. Kim is said by Channel A News analysts to be eager for a summit with President Xi of China particularly with respect to economic relief and diplomatic support. The North Korean situation, without substantial help from China, could descend into disorder and anarchy, simply from starvation, lack of fuel and currency reserves. Western sources don't seem to be too concerned about what China might do in such a situation. It's almost a sure thing that China would invade and occupy the North to the narrow most distance between the East Sea and West Sea coasts in North Korea to secure their national security interests, including the security of North Korean nuclear assets cut adrift from the accountability of an identifiable command structure. Certainly US forces won't be allowed the luxury, not permitted in 1950, to bomb, attack, or occupy at will regions proximate to the Chinese frontier. It is often said by the uninformed, so what if North Korea's regime collapses into anarchy or is decapitated as the result of this hybrid warfare strategy styled as "negotiations?"